VACCINES, HOW TO PREDICT EPIDEMICS, AND THE GENERATION OF IMMUNITY IN POPULATIONS

HOW TO PREDICT EPIDEMICS
By Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D.

Many have advanced the idea that vaccination is perhaps Mankind’s greatest medical achievement. Historically, it has been documented that the inoculation of dried pox-pus was practiced in Persia and India as an operation where the surface of the body was injured with needles or lancets, and foreign puss from “pox,” or perhaps from other disease effusions were placed into direct contact with the bloody wound or bloodstream of the inoculation recipient.

Among the Arabs, there are accounts that citizens would “purchase the pox,” by exchanging raisins and other fruits with an infected person who would serve as the donor of the lymph (Pylarini, Phil Trans., 1716 Vol XXIV., p, 393). In ancient China, it is claimed that dried material from pox and other disease-derived effusions were introduced in the nostrils of both children and adults. There is evidence that controversy raged regarding the use of fresh disease-derived material versus dried, old material, which could have made a substantial difference in the virulence of an inoculum.

Nobody predicted The Black Death of 1347- 1353. As far as we know, there were no plague vaccines in existence then.

Similarly, nobody predicted The Great Plague that killed a fifth of London’s population in 1665-1666. There was no universally mandated plague vaccine back then. Nor were there plague vaccines during the 313 years (between 1353 and 1665) to prevent a plague epidemic during those years. Therefore, we may assume a plague vaccine played no role whatsoever in the occurrence, prevention, or recurrence of these two plague epidemics, and nobody could have predicted that the two great epidemics would be separated by 313 years. Plague is spread by rats, and fleas, but other “forms” are thought to exist.

The great yellow fever outbreak said by medical historians to have killed 2/5 of the Philadelphia population in 1793 was not prevented by a universally-implemented vaccine program (“Bring Out Your Dead,”  Powell, Time Reading Program Special Edition Books, 1949). Historical accounts claim that the famous Dr. Benjamin Rush (the revered signer of The Declaration of Independence) thought yellow fever to be caused by rotting coffee on the Philadelphia docks. Dr. Rush also thought the best therapeutic approach for yellow fever consisted of near lethal doses of mercury, combined with exsanguinations to the extent that many of his patients were poisoned or bled to death, before (and apparently after) French physicians pointed out to him the blood to body weight ratio. No mention of vaccination regarding yellow fever can be found in any  reference from this era. This is to be expected, because it wasn’t until Christmas morning in the year 1900, when Walter Reed conducted his yellow fever transmission experiment, which showed that yellow fever was transferred via the mosquito.

Although the point has been belabored here with the examples of plague and yellow fever on purpose, the relationship between epidemics, prevention of epidemics, vaccine campaigns, and recurring epidemics must be clearly defined with respect to causality or lack of causality when considering modern epidemic occurrences, and vaccination or lack of vaccination.

In addition, it should be mentioned, as was suggested in a not well known book entitled, “Life Among Doctors” (Harcourt, Brace, New York, 1949), as the famous microbe hunter and chronicler, Paul De Kruif convincingly emphasized, evidence that changes in nutritional additives to foods, as well as improvements in the realization of civil hygienic programs (like the Roman aqueducts), have most likely reduced the spread of pathogens and, prevented epidemics, and improved the quality of life for that portion of humanity that has instituted these habits and technologies. For instance, De Kruif showed how the preponderance of evidence appears to show that although natural resistance to epidemics is a fundamental part of our biology, and mass vaccination programs have retarded our understanding of background incidence and resistance of infectious disease occurrence, it is clear that improvements in mass nutrition strategies first put into place by Dr. Spies after President Franklin Roosevelt refused to fund preventative medicine programs in favor of spending for “planes, bombs, and bullets” (as he told De Kruif in a personal interview) for the impending World War, have played a major role in the prevention of epidemic diseases, both in recent history and probably during antiquity, as practiced by the Greeks (flushable toilets at Knosos Crete, 2,000 BC) and Romans (the aqueducts, 1A.D.).

This review of epidemics and vaccination exposes great harm and misconceptions about vaccines and epidemics that at first were shocking even to the author of this document. But as history shows, science, medicine, financial concerns, superstition, public health concerns, eugenic ideas, and many other forces including even religion, have shifted in their relative influences over time to bring us we believe to be true, which can be best documented chronologically. In this direction, if and when scientifically valid associations between vaccines and epidemics are more fully understood and as a consequence when harm is avoided, hopefully the conceptual advances this chronology delivers might serve to improve human health and well-being, and ward off tragedy due to misplaced eugenic ideas, practices, and thinking. Most importantly perhaps, the following information should raise the critical question: what is the evidence that widespread or universal vaccination of a population will generate immunity, or are there perhaps better preventative measures that are yet to be discovered in the context of communicable pathogens and epidemics?

Scientifically speaking, we know so little about vaccines and their relationship to epidemics. There are certain principles that will seem to emerge though, by examining this  chronological history. One fact that becomes evident from the beginning, however, is the fact vaccines and vaccination campaigns, or epidemics seldom appear to behave the way we are told they behave. Questions far outnumber any certainties, regarding vaccines or epidemics.

Natural epidemics, or “pandemics” are thought by some to have severely culled the populations of our ancestors. It has even been suggested on the basis of no evidence that perhaps the Neanderthals were carried off by a virus. Climate changes could have led to their disappearance (if indeed Neanderthals constituted a different species from modern man as some believe because their heads were larger, their skeletal frames more robust than ours, and some would even say, that the art work they left behind was more inspired than some of ours. In all of my reading of medical history, there is no evidence or proof I am aware of that any primate pathogen had led to the extinction of any non-human primate species or groups of Homo sapiens, except of course, for the mythology that “HIV” is nearly 100% fatal, without “life-extending” treatment. But at the same time, we were told we were in the capable hands of physicians and scientists, backed by political and financial mandates about our ability to conquer all obstacles by “practicing medicine” and “scientifically-designed clinical trials.  For instance, in 1984 Margaret Heckler, the U.S. Government, and Dr. Robert C. Gallo promised in a press conference that an “HIV” vaccine would be forthcoming in 2 years (by 1986). But now in hindsight, and as presented to the 1995 Congress of the United States by their Office of Technology assessment, we know that this promise has not been realized despite the fact that (as admitted in that 1995 Technology Assessment presented to Congress following 30 then failed “HIV” vaccines:

More companies are engaged in HIV vaccine research than in research for any other type of vaccine. Potential liability may have discouraged some companies, but it has not stopped HIV vaccine development.”

This push and flurry of activity and funding continues still today. For instance, currently (January, 2012) to date there have been 64 failed “HIV” vaccine trials and there are 172 in the U.S. “HIV” pipeline that are supported by a $500 million/year price tag for the American tax payer. Toward the end of this timeline of human vaccine experimentation, such easily available facts should make it clear that the AIDS era itself has played a relatively small, if any role in either scientific or medical progress in the context of human health, and perhaps has played a late and significant role at best in the history of vaccines and vaccination due to the massive, often prematurely halted failures of any and all “HIV” vaccine components to evoke immunity, or in many cases even seroconversion.

However, this is not to say that the AIDS era and its dozens of publicized vaccine failures and terminations of harmful vaccine trials may not at this point in history begin to play the most decisive role in the history of vaccination and specifically, a continued tacit acceptance of the Jennerian paradigm of vaccination. Indeed, for example, not only the paradox of why a positive “HIV” test result brings into sharp contradiction the principle of vaccination being a means to evoke immunity from foreign potentially harmful microbes or toxins, but especially when the failure of all past and current “HIV” vaccine trials (especially the most recent AIDSVAX, STEP, and Thailand Military trials)  are incorporated into the larger picture of an analysis of the history of the often but not always dangerous medical procedure of inoculation or vaccination of both individuals and populations via direct transference of vile and immune-compromising materials directly into the blood to evade mucosal immune mechanisms.

The repetitive failure of both human and animal vaccination experiments are clearly revealed and evident in the following somewhat randomly chosen chronological history, and as such, it is almost a certainty that most vaccine campaigns can and do frequently predict when and where small epidemics will occur concomitant with the vaccination campaigns themselves. Indeed, the AIDS era itself, and its repeated failures is the best possible argument as to why all vaccines should be halted, or at least scientifically tested first, in both human and animal contexts, until their efficacy and safety can be properly evaluated.

More importantly, the evidence that this time-line over several centuries  also shows that those who advocate for universal vaccination programs are acting like prophets or religious seers. When they tell you that, “if this or that vaccine were not available, the rates of disease would have been much higher, or they will be much higher,” this kind of prognostication is not based on the carefully compiled evidence we have, for example, from decades or even entire centuries of Naval re-vaccination records, or promoted vaccine crusades such as the first polio vaccine, that was halted almost as soon as it was implemented nationwide, because it increased the rates of paralysis in the vaccinated .

As the periodic and unpredictable occurrences of the bubonic plague that I belabored above illustrates, and since no vaccines were in place to prevent a more than 300 year recurrence of plague interval, epidemics such as plague and yellow fever and others have been for the most part unpredictable in their periodicity or timing in history, save for the fact that human conflicts and wars tend to bring them on.

Are fear-mongering campaigns, and other initiatives and infrastructure that accompany these pogroms even necessary any longer, compared to accurate factual information regarding these issues, or is our almost instinctive fear of contagion and epidemics and “healthy carriers” justified by science or history? Why has our fear of contagion and the healthy carrier state become one of the most powerful forces that shape our collective behavior, our decisions to expose our offspring or ourselves to things like a polio vaccine derived from feces extracts, and which compel us to jab our infants with hepatitis B vaccines before their immune systems are even developed, and a decade and a half before we are told our children will become drug addicts and prostitutes, and that this vaccine (or the HPV vaccine) might protect them from this fate?

A more precise way to consider these questions perhaps is to ask them in the following way:

Has our fear of the healthy carrier state originated from the biological basis of human behavior, from our culture, our learned behavior, or from some mixture of these phenomena? Is it “pure instinct,” for example, that compels some parents who belong to day care centers or groups, to shun other children and their parents from those day care centers, if those parents refuse to vaccinate or who don’t receive vaccinations, and who, as religiously faithful pro-vaccinationists, seemingly believe with all of their hearts, that not to vaccinate everybody is to recklessly endanger the vary life of their own child and the population as a whole? Are these fears of the parents warranted who fear that an nonvaccinated child is a walking plague-generator, and how have these notions come about?

A VACCINE TIMELINE OF HUMANS (Last Update, 2/2012).

THE SMALLPOX ERAS:

Prerecorded history (oral history): Legend has it that Chinese would blow year-old dried, ground up, and powdered disease effusions into the noses of children to protect them from these diseases.

Persians would “purchase the pox” and then with lancets, cut the arm, and smear the material, either fresh or old material, directly on the wound.

Early Christian Greeks placed a coin into a loaf of bread on Easter, and the person who selected the coin-implanted bread-slice, would be protected from harmful diseases, or thoughts.

Various poorly documented plagues and poorly recorded “pestilances” during the early Christian era, are almost universally associated with conquests, warfare, and mass migrations.

1717 Jesuits introduce inoculation from India to England with the help of Lady Montague.

1767 Dr. Holwell sends back from India his report on the Brahmins inoculation techniques (Holwell, J. Z., M.D., An Account of the Manner of Inoculating for the Smallpox in the East Indies, London, 1767).

1796 It has been widely documented that James Phipps, the 8-year-old vaccinated by William Jenner, was revaccinated 20 times. He died at age 20. Jenner’s own son, who was also vaccinated more than once, died at 21.

1797 Edward Jenner sent a paper to the Royal Society about variolae vaccinae or smallpox of the cow and its potential similarities to human smallpox, and tried to popularize the folklore that: exposure to inflamed cow utters with corresponding inflammation or eruptions on milk-maids hands is the cow form of human smallpox. The paper is rejected and returned with a warning “He had better not promulgate such a wild idea if he valued his reputation.”

1798 Edward Jenner publishes his Inquiry variolae vaccinae, or smallpox of the cow.

1799 Jennerian doctrine and the practice of vaccination spreads all over England.

1800 Jennerian vaccination doctrine spreads all over the world. Benjamin Waterhouse of Harvard University brings it to the U. S. His medical credentials are deemed fraudulent.

1803 Baron, in his “Life of Jenner,” vol i., p. 604, says that Mr. Allen, Secretary to Lord Holland, writing to Jenner from Madrid in 1803, observes:  “There is no country likely to receive more benefits from your labours than Spain; for, on the one hand, the mortality among children from small-pox has always been very great; and, on the other hand, the inoculation for the cow-pox has been received with the same enthusiasm here as in the rest of Europe.” .. . .”The result, however, was the reverse of satisfactory; the inoculation of the spurious sort has proved fatal to many children at Seville, who have fallen victims to the small-pox after they had been pronounced secure from that disease.”

1809 In 1809, Massachusetts passed the first mandatory vaccination law in the U.S.

1824 English scientist John Cooke observed: ‘The fumes from these metals, or the receptance of them in solution into the stomach, often causes paralysis. Metal workers had suffered for centuries from a paralysis similar to polio caused by the lead and arsenic in the metals they were working with.”

1839 Smallpox epidemic sweeps England and kills 22,081 people.

1840 Inoculation is outlawed by the British Parliament.

1850 In 1850, in the U.S. frigate Independence, with a ship’s company of 560 people aboard, there were 116 cases of smallpox, seven fatal. Fleet-surgeon Whelen wrote: “The crew of this ship almost universally presented what are regarded as genuine vaccine marks. The protection, however, proved to be quite imperfect.”

1850 The New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal 1880, published a communication from Dr. T. H. Bemiss, Lahaina, Hawaii, on the introduction and spread of leprosy in these islands. “Alarmed,” says the writer, “by an invasion of small-pox in 1853, a general vaccination of the whole population was ordered, and physicians being at that time very few on the islands, non-professionals aided in the work. It is charged by some that, as a natural result of the labours of the heterogeneous force so appointed, not only syphilis but also leprosy was greatly increased. In my last circuit trip in my district, I found very few adults who had never been vaccinated. This involves the question of inoculability (of leprosy), in my opinion the main, if not the only means of propagation, other than inheritance.”

1850 Massachusetts is the first state to require vaccination as a school requirement.

1853 In England, The Compulsory Vaccination Act is passed by Parliament. Every parent is required to have their baby vaccinated within 3 months of birth or face a fine of 20 shillings.

1855 Medical Inquisition begins in U. S., as Massachusetts is the first state to adopt mandatory vaccination laws.

1860 The following is part of a letter which appeared in the Lancet on July 7th, 1860, signed a “Military Surgeon:” “VACCINATION AT SHORNCLIFFE.— SIR,— Having seen in the Lancet of last week an article commenting on a return moved for by Mr. DUNCOMBE, respecting those who have died from Vaccination, the number of amputations required to save life at the camp at Shorncliffe, I can only say that it would be advisable to extend this return, and ask for the number of those who have died or had their arms amputated since the promulgation of an order from the late Director-General ALEXANDER, limiting the performance of the operation to a particular part of the arm, viz., two inches above the elbow-joint in front, immediately over the insertion of the deltoid muscle. The results from this unfortunate erroneous rule, have, I fear, produced an amount of injury that will never be known, as it will be exceedingly difficult, even in the present day, to procure an accurate return, as military medical men are too fully alive to the injury likely to occur to their future prospects of promotion in the service, were they found ready and willing to expose such mistakes. The irritation, inflammation, and consequent loss of limb, and in some cases of life, from adopting this rule, I myself am practically acquainted with, as I was on board, not very long since, in a case where a fine healthy young soldier had his arm amputated at the shoulder-joint to save his life, in consequence of mortification supervening upon erysipelatous inflammation of the forearm after Vaccination.”

1864 “Upon the U.S. steamship Jamestown, serving in Japanese waters, there occurred, in 1864, among a ship’s company of 212 persons, 31 cases of small-pox, with four deaths. The entire crew had been vaccinated after leaving the United States.”

1867 Nonpayment of fines for skipping smallpox vaccination result in harsher penalties. Thousands defy the medical Inquisition and leave Britain rather than submit their children to the practice.

1868 Anti-Compulsory Vaccination League is formed in Britain.

1868 “Small-pox was introduced from San Francisco in the year 1868. In that year a general vaccination took place, spring lancets being used, which the President of the Board of Health (Mr. David Dayton) informed me were difficult, if not impossible, to disinfect—the operation causing irreparable mischief. The synchronicity of the spread of leprosy with general vaccination is a matter beyond discussion, and this terrible disease soon afterwards obtained such a foothold amongst the Hawaiians that the Government made a first attempt to control it by means of segregation. Another outbreak of smallpox occurred in 1873, and yet another in 1881, both followed by general arm-to-arm vaccination and a rapid and alarming development of leprosy, as may be seen in successive reports of the Board of Health. While the preponderance of medical and scientific opinion is against the theory that leprosy is, in the ordinary sense of the word, a contagious disease, the evidence in favour of its being communicable by inoculation is overwhelming.”

1868 The excessive mortality among the prisoners at Andersonville, in the American Civil War, has been mainly attributed to the general re-vaccination, practiced upon them under conditions of severe morbidity. JOSEPH JONES, M.D., Professor of Physiology and Pathology, University, Nashville, U.S.,1868, wrote: “The Federal prisoners confined in Camp Sumpter, Andersonville, Georgia, were vaccinated, and, in a number of cases, large gangrenous ulcers appeared at the points where the vaccine lymph had been inserted, causing extensive destruction of tissues, exposing arteries, nerves and bones, and necessitating amputation in more than one instance. From the establishment of the prison, on February 24th, 1864, to October 1st, over 10,000 Federal prisoners died, i.e., near one-third of the entire number perished in less than seven months. These accidents led to the belief among some of the prisoners that the surgeons had intentionally introduced poisonous matter into their arms during vaccination. No wonder they had such a persuasion, seeing that about 100 of them lost the use of their arms, and about 200 were so injured that they soon afterwards died. Though some medical officers were tried before a special military commission, convened in accordance with orders from the War Office at Washington, on the charge of having willfully poisoned the Federal prisoners with vaccine lymph, it was shewn that the unhappy consequences of vaccination at Andersonville were paralleled in the Northern prisons. ‘After careful inquiries,’ says Dr. JONES, ‘among returned Confederate prisoners, I am convinced that the accidents attending Vaccination were quite as numerous and severe in Northern prisons as in Southern.”

1870 “In 1870, sixty-one cases [of smallpox] occurred on the United States steam ship Franklin. The disease first appeared on a sailor with ‘an excellent vaccine scar.’ The officers and crew were immediately vaccinated with fresh vaccine matter obtained at Lisbon, this vaccination being the third one during the cruise. Nineteen days later, the second case occurred. The disease has been epidemic in many places in Europe during the past season, but I hoped our vaccinations would prevent trouble with it on board ship. In a cruise of the North Carolina up the Mediterranean, she shipped at Norfolk a crew of 900 men, most of whom had been vaccinated, or had the small-pox, but were nevertheless twice vaccinated prior to the ship sailing, a third time at Gibraltar, and a fourth time at Port Mahon. Dr. HENDERSON, who reports these facts, states that notwithstanding this ultra vaccination under such various circumstances of virus, climate, 157 of the crew had varioloid.”

1870 Outbreak of smallpox all over Europe.

1871 Smallpox continues to rage all over Europe.

1871 “Europeans resolutely object to be vaccinated with lymph from native sources; and, notwithstanding the law, when imported lymph cannot be obtained they and their children remain unvaccinated. As a consequence, the population of Europeans attacked with leprosy is comparatively small and, indeed, of rare occurrence, except in the case of soldiers who are subject to the military regulation of revaccination. This repugnance to native lymph on the part of Europeans in the West Indies was pointed out by Dr. R. Hall Bakewell, Vaccinator – General, Trinidad, in his remarkable evidence before the Select Parliamentary Committee of 1871, and has been referred to by Dr. Castor, of British Guiana, and other authorities.”

1879 Mr. P. A. TAYLOR, reveals his intention to introduce a Bill during the next Session for the Repeal of the Compulsory Clauses of the Vaccination Acts, and told the House of Commons, in April, 1879, that he had “seen dozens and scores of persons who had stated to him that they honestly believed that their children had died from vaccination. They took perfectly healthy children to be vaccinated, an incision was made in the arm, in a few days a sore appeared on the arm, from thence it spread all over the body, and finally the children died in agony” (Lancet, August 21st, 1881).

1880 Mr. J. T. HIBBERT, M.P., then Parliamentary Secretary to the Local Government Department, written in June, 1880: “The Return (433) shews an increase of deaths from syphilis of infants under one year from 255, in 1847,—to 1,554, in 1875,—which, in my opinion, is one of the most unsatisfactory features in connection with vaccination, and one which leads me to support the proposed modification of the Vaccination Law now before the House of Commons.”—Lancet, July 17th, 1880.

1880 MEAN ANNUAL RATE OF MORTALITY IN ENGLAND from SMALL-POX (P. lxxix., Table 34, of the 43rd Annual Report of the Registrar-General, 1882) N.B.—Vaccination made compulsory, 1853; more stringently so, I867.

“Small-pox vaccination was made compulsory by an Act of Parliament in the year 1853; again in 1867; and still more stringent in 1871. Since 1853, we have had three epidemics of small-pox, each being more severe than the one preceding.

Date Deaths from Small-pox.
1st 1857—58—59                         14,244
2nd 1863—64—65                       20,059
3rd 1870—71—72                        44,840

June 2, 1881, Pasteur was challenged to give an anthrax vaccine demonstration before the Agricultural Society of Melun, at the farm of Pouilly-le-Fort. On Europe’s most famous horse doctors, human doctors, animal breeders, senators, reporters, farmers, and scientists anxiously waited, and watched, as 24 out of 24 anthrax-inoculated sheep grazed happily next to a row of 22 out of 24 dead ones, because the 22/24 dead ones weren’t vaccinated with Pasteur’s anthrax vaccine.

1883 A Vaccine Disaster Record, comprising particulars of more than 400 fatal vaccination cases by F. BAKER, Esq., of the Inner Temple, was published in May, 1883.

1885 (July 6) It was widely acknowledged that Pasteur’s vaccination of the nine-year old boy, Joseph Meister, whom Pasteur injected with the “weakened microbes” of hydrophobia (rabies) 2 days after the boy had been bitten 14 times by a rabid dog, ” saved the boy, and heralded a true revolution in Europe against the rabies virus (hydrophobia was what rabies was called at the time because dogs infected with it acted as if ‘afraid of water’). The paradox regarding how to present a virulent enough virus to protect from equally virulent natural infections, versus the safety of a particular strain in the vaccinated host (so it wouldn’t kill the recipient) was a central paradox with which Pasteur grappled with and still is today. The rabies syndrome requires typically about 2-3 full weeks to induce its first clinical symptoms. The most virulent strains that Pasteur developed in rabbits were developed by sequentially infecting rabbits with the sera or saliva of hydrophobic dogs, until he could cause rabid symptoms in the rabbits after only 8 days instead of 2-3 weeks (according to Pasteur’s records as presented by Patrice Debre in her book entitled, “Louis Pasteur“).  Pasteur then found that by drying out of these “virulent-strain infected” rabbit spinal cords for increasing lengths of time before re-inoculation into dogs (or other rabbits) would completely disarm the pathogenicity of the virulent strain after about 10-12 days of drying. However, caution suggests that despite this information and major advance in the science of vaccinology, we do not know for sure that Joseph Meister would have gone on to develop the full rabies syndrome, because toward the beginning of his rabies research, as Debre carefully chronicled, it was hit and miss with respect to infecting every dog to produce hydrophobia in the recipient(s), (according to some of Pasteur’s historians, at best only about 50% of Pasteur’s recipient dogs would acquire the syndrome from material extracted from the mouths of hydrophobia-symptom-exhibiting dogs. Perhaps Joseph Meister was among that same 50% insensitive group-we’ll never know). With further trial and error, though, Pasteur eventually demonstrated that 100% of his non-infected recipient dogs, and rabbits would go on to develop hydrophobic symptoms via intracranial injections into their brains with fresh fluids extracted from hydrophobic dogs. Nevertheless, according to most historians of this period, Pasteur’s anthrax vaccine for livestock did not consistently prevent anthrax from destroying cattle, and, it is documented that the French farmers came after Pasteur with a vengeance after one of his mass vaccination programs destroyed thousands of cattle throughout France.

Note: Introduction of foreign and potentially debilitating proteins following Pasteur’s resolution of the paradox as to how to introduce sufficiently protective yet not disease-causing fluids directly into the brains of experimental subjects would become the preferred and in many cases the only means of demonstrating future mysterious disease-causing “agents” in future vaccine research, where it couldn’t be demonstrated scientifically, as in the case of hydrophobia, that simple exposures to suspected pathogens (like the bite marks on Meister’s arms) would cause disease in significant numbers of animal or human subjects. Examples of agents that could induce disease only by exposing brains to non-anaeseptically obtained foreign proteins and toxins include, the polio agent, various so-called cancer-associated agents, and, the prion disease agents.

1885 “The earliest record of an epidemic caused by Hepatitis B virus was made by Lurman in 1885. An outbreak of smallpox occurred in Bremen in 1883 and 1,289 shipyard employees were vaccinated with lymph from other people. After several weeks, and up to eight months later, 191 of the vaccinated workers became ill with jaundice and were diagnosed as suffering from serum hepatitis. Other employees who had been inoculated with different batches of lymph remained healthy. Lurman’s paper, now regarded as a classical example of an epidemiological study, proved that contaminated lymph was the source of the outbreak” (from Wikipedia). (Lurman A. (1885) Eine icterus epidemic. (In German). Berl Klin Woschenschr 22:20–3).

1886 Dr. Creighton, one of the most learned medical scholars of the nineteenth century who wrote The History of Epidemics informed the Royal Commission that when he was commissioned by them to write the article on vaccination in the Encyclopedia Britannica regarding Jenner’s contribution, “that he had no doubt about the value of vaccination, that it never occurred to him to question the thing at all, and that he took it as one of the things he had been taught as a student.” He left the Commission in no doubt as to the result of his studies in preparation for writing the piece: “In my opinion,” Dr. Creighton said, “based on an extended study of the original data, I conclude that] Jenner’s work was incorrect, and that cowpox was not, as Jenner stated, ‘Variola Vaccinse,’ and cowpox has nothing to do with variola and was not a protective against variola, and vaccination affords no protection against smallpox.

1886-1892 In Australia when a few children died as a result of smallpox vaccinations, the government abolished compulsory vaccination in that country and smallpox suddenly declined to the vanishing point. Australia had only three cases of smallpox in 15 years as compared with Japan’s record of 165,774 cases and 28,979 deaths from this cause in only 7 years under compulsory vaccination and re-vaccination.

1889 Dr. G. D. M’Reddie, Civil Surgeon, in his letter to Dr. Ghose, on the 18th February, 1888, states: “From observations I know leprosy is hereditary. It is also contagious in the sense that it is necessary for the discharge from a leprous ulcer to come into direct contact with the broken skin of the recipient, or the blood of a leper to be inoculated into the system, as in vaccination.” (Report on Leprosy to the Hon. H. Beverley, MA., by Madhub Chunder Ghose, Leper Asylum, Calcutta, August 27th, 1889).

1889 Beginning of a list of rabies vaccine victims prepared by anti-vivisectionists: Note: On that list, there is one column entitled, “Died Of Hydrophobia,” which indicated that the rabies vaccine had no effect, except perhaps a negative one. The rest of the list regarding vaccine “successes,” looks much the same (this compilation is known as Pasteur’s ‘Hecatomb.”

1890 In 1890, as Professor of Hygiene in Berlin, Koch introduced a remedy for turberculosis made from the bacillis itself. Clearly borrowed from homeopathy, Tuberculin had to be employed in homeopathic doses, which Koch failed to do, causing thousands of deaths and virtually ending the career of the Father of German Bacteriology (Harris L. Coulter, Divided Legacy, North Atlantic Books, 1994; researched by Harris Coulter, a now Late friend of mine, who along with co-author Barbara Loe Fisher also wrote the vaccine torture masterpiece entitled, “A Shot In The Dark”).

1892 In an article on Keanu’s inoculation, the Occidental Medical Times, April, 1892, Dr Sidney Bourne Swift intimates that: “It must not be forgotten that the leprosy was first discernible at the points of inoculation. Nor can it be considered remarkable, knowing how the disease had been propagated by the vaccination lancet. In one instance reported to Queen Liliuokokalani, an entire school in Hawaii was swept away, with the exception of a single survivor, by this means.”

1892 Hawaiian Legislature, June 25, 1892. DAVID DAYTON, Esq., President, Board of Health. “SIR,—An effort is being made in the Legislature to repeal or amend the law relating to vaccination; the object being to leave vaccination optional with parents and individuals. The chief objection raised against the present compulsory system appears to be the belief of some that leprosy, and other diseases, have been propagated by means of vaccination.”

1892 Honolulu Board of Health for 1892 documents that: “Resistance to vaccination is spreading in many districts in these islands, and at the same time there is observed a sensible diminution in the number of lepers. In New Zealand, prosecutions for non-vaccination have for some time been abandoned. In the South African Colonies of Natal and Cape Colony the vaccination laws are enforced only during outbreaks of small-pox, and vaccination is everywhere regarded with mistrust. In the Transvaal and Orange Free State vaccination is entirely optional. In England there are about one hundred towns and poor law unions where the vaccination laws are a dead letter. In several of the Swiss cantons compulsory vaccination has been tried and abolished, and in no canton is there any penalty for non-vaccination. An attempt was made to pass a federal vaccination law in 1881, and was defeated in a Referendum by 253,968 votes against 67,820. In the Australasian Colony of Tasmania the compulsory law has been suspended by reason of its deleterious effects on the health of the people. In the Colonies of New South Wales. and Queensland, Australia, the people have successfully resisted every attempt to impose the hotly-disputed Jennerian dogma upon them.”

1892 Paralysis outbreaks began to occur in Vermont, in an apple growing region. In his report the Government Inspector Dr. Charles Caverly noted that parents reported that some children fell ill after eating fruit. He stated that ‘infantile paralysis usually occurred in families with more than one child, and as no efforts were made at isolation it was very certain it was non-contagious’ (with only one child in the family having been struck).

1894 Those who opposed vaccination were blasted in the New York Times as engaging “in a futile attempt to head off human progress and to reopen a question about which pretty much all of the world has made up its mind.” (REF: Cited in Brooklyn Medical Journal. 8(1894):576 and reference in Colgrove, p.14).

1894 In his inaugural Address to Medical Society of King’s College, October 26th, Dr. Edward Crookshank claimed that: “That vaccination is capable of extirpating the disease or of controlling epidemic waves is absolutely negated by the epidemic in 1825, and the epidemics which followed in quick succession in 1838, in 1840, 1841, 1844-5, 1848, 1851-2. Vaccination was made compulsory in 1853, but epidemics followed in 1854, 1855, and 1856, culminating in the terrible epidemic in 1871-72 with more than 42,000 deaths. Epidemics followed in 1877 and 1881.” en.wikipedia.org//index.php?title=Edgar_Crookshank&action=edit&section=2>

1896 Final report of the Royal Commission on vaccination. The commission could not ignore the evidence against vaccination so they recommended that mandatory vaccination should be stopped.

1896 Walter Robert Hadwen, MD, a vocal, late nineteenth century anti-vaccination reformer:

The very moment you take a medical prescription and you incorporate it into an act of Parliament, it passes beyond the confines of a purely medical question and becomes essentially a social and political one.” REF: Hadwen, W.R. “The Case Against Vaccination.” Gloucester: Gloucester Anti-vaccination League, 1896. p 5.

1898 In England, a Royal Commission is appointed to inquire into certain aspects of the vaccination question. The committee would be in session for 7 years and would issue 6 reports, with the final report in 1896. The result of the final report was the Vaccination Act of 1898.

1898 Vaccination Act removes penalties from vaccination law.

1900 Unsubstantiated claim is published that the Rockefeller and J. P. Morgan syndicate buys Encyclopedia Britannica and all derogatory references to vaccination are removed.

1900 Use of medical examinations to usurp the judgment and care of parents occurred around the turn of the century are set into place when ‘pre-tubercular children’—children who were discovered through laboratory testing to be infected with TB but who had no symptoms—were removed from their homes and placed in a medical sanatorium. According to Colgrove: “Separation of endangered children from their parents was the cornerstone of an overall plan to protect them from the unhealthy influences [of their parents]. Although the transfer of a child to a sanatorium was ostensibly voluntary, coercion by charitable organizations and health officials of the poor, often immigrant, families was sometimes applied.” (REF: Colgrove, pg. 51). In 1900 the only vaccine given to schoolchildren was smallpox.”

1901 Boston experiences the last major small pox epidemic in the country, leading to 1,596 cases and 270 reported deaths (17 percent).

THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY EUGENICISTS BEGIN THEIR COORDINATED EFFORTS TO CONTROL CITIZENS AND PARENTS VIA MEDICAL TERRORISM:

1901-2  A Massachusetts state statute granted city boards of health the authority to require vaccination when necessary for public health or safety. For example, the Cambridge Board of Health adopted an ordinance requiring all residents to be vaccinated or to pay a hefty fine of five dollars, the equivalent of $118 today. During the 1901-02 outbreaks, Boston public health officials dispatched teams of physicians and police officers to administer vaccinations, by force if necessary. Even though outbreaks occurred across all ethnic and economic classes, efforts were concentrated on neighborhoods populated by immigrants and ethnic minorities.” REF: Lawrence H. Officer and Samuel H. Williamson, “Purchasing Power of Money in the United States from 1774 to 2006,” MeasuringWorth.Com, 2007.

“One of four Massachusetts residents who resisted the ordinance was Rev. Henning Jacobson, who asserted that he and his son had developed serious reactions to previous vaccinations and refused to be revaccinated during the epidemic. State law permitted a medical exemption for children at risk from vaccination but held no exclusions for adults. Jacobson argued that the compulsory vaccination law was “…unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive, and therefore, hostile to the inherent right of every freeman to care for his own body and health in such a way as to him seems best; and that the execution of such a law against one who objects to vaccination, for whatever reason, is nothing short of an assault upon his person.”

1905 Jacobson v Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 197 US 11. “Failing three times in the lower courts, Jacobson took his case to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1905. The question before the Court was whether the state had overstepped its authority and whether the sphere of personal liberty was protected by the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. In making their ruling, the justices no doubt took into account the difficulty Boston had experienced containing the smallpox outbreak in 1901-02. Perhaps the justices had family members who had been vaccinated or had experienced smallpox. Perhaps they considered the lack of standardized public health programs. Whatever criteria were used, the Supreme Court handed down its landmark ruling in 1905: States were given the right to force vaccinations on their citizens if they deemed vaccination to be the best way to protect the community from disease.”

“As a result, the Jacobson decision has defined the central relationship between the rights of the individual vs. the role of the government to protect its citizens against infectious diseases and epidemics to the present day. Jacobson is the first case in U.S. history to deal with the right of self-determination regarding one’s own body. The Court affirmed that it was the prerogative of each state legislature to determine how to control an epidemic, including the use of police powers if deemed necessary. Because the federal judiciary could not usurp the role and powers of the states, each state was given the right to decide its own vaccination laws and mandates. The only stipulation given by the Court was that states were to ensure that enforcement must not be ‘unreasonable, arbitrary or oppressive.’ The Court clearly stated that protection of the public would supersede individual interests for the ‘greater good.” REF: Mariner, Wendy K. JD, LLM, MPH, et al. ‘Jacobson v Massachusetts It’s Not Your Great-Great-Grandfather’s Public Health Law.’ American Journal of Public Health. April 2005, Vol 95, No. 4.

“The issues in Jacobson are enduring because they arose from the fabric of American democracy and our Constitution. Jacobson was one of the few Supreme Court cases before 1960 in which a citizen challenged the state’s authority to impose mandatory restrictions on personal liberty for public health purposes. Jacobson laid the foundation for U.S. public health officials to mandate vaccination by law.” REF: Jacobson v. Massachusetts and Public Health Law: Perspectives in 2005. http://www2.cdc.gov/phlp/jacobson/pdfs/public_health_guide.pdf

1905 U.S. Supreme Court upholds state law mandating smallpox vaccinations.

1906 to 1928 Vaccines against pertussis and diphtheria developed.

1907 Despite the Supreme Court’s emphasis on protecting the “greater good,” Utah enacts laws expressly forbidding the passage of any mandatory vaccination requirements.

1907 Calcium arsenate comes into use primarily on cotton crops.

1908 A Massachusetts town with three cotton mills and apple orchards recorded that 69 children suddenly fell ill with infantile paralysis.

1909 The UK bans apple imports from the States because of heavy lead arsenate residues.

1909 Numerous outbreaks of “serum hepatitis” and jaundice now attributed to hepatitis B virus were reported following the introduction, in 1909, of hypodermic needles that were used, and more importantly reused, for administering salvarsan for the treatment of syphilis.

1910 Flexer and Lewis ground up human spinal cord of a paralysis victim, and as Pasteur had done in the context of rabies,  injected the suspension directly into a monkey’s brain. That (one) monkey became paralyzed, then they extracted some fluid from its brain, and injected it into another monkey’s brain, and so on through a series of monkeys paralyzing all of them in the process [with the foreign proteins of other monkeys directly injected into the brains and nervous systems of the recipients]. But making the monkeys drink the liquid or injecting into their arms, the suspension did not paralyze them.

A WORLD GOES TO WAR-MANDATORY VACCINATIONS OF SOLDIERS BEGINS-THE INFLUENZA ERA BEGINS:

1911 Vaccination is made mandatory in the U.S. armed forces.

1912 Parliamentary records of 1912 show that in New Zealand, the following vaccines and serums were used (Peter and Hilary Butler: “Just a little prick,” ISBN 0473 10844 5):

Acne Vaccine (Mixed)
Acne Bacillus vaccine
Coley’s Fluid
Colt Bacillus Vaccine
Combined Vaccines for colds.
Catarrhalis Micrococcus Vaccine
Dipth. Anti Sera,
Friedlander Bacillus Vaccine
Gonococcus Vaccine
Influenza Bacillus Vaccine
Meningococcus Anti Serum.
Plague (Haffkine’s Prophylactic)
Pituitary Extract (Valporole)
Pneumococcus Vaccine
Staphylococcus vaccine (mixed)
Staphylococcus Vaccine (Aureus)
Staphylococcus Anti Serum, (Polyvalent)
Staphylococcus Anti Sera, Puerperal Fever
Staphylococcus Anti Sera, Pyogenes
Staphylococcus Anti Sera, Rheumatic Fever
Staphylococcus Anti Sera, Erysipelas,
New Tuberculin T.R. (Koch)
New Tuberculin T.R. (Azoules)
New Tuberculin T.R. (Koch), (Lucius and Bruning.)
Tuberculin for Von Piquet’s reaction.
Tuberculin (Old) Human (Koch)
Tuberculin (Old) Bovine (Koch)
Tubercle Emulsion (Lucius and Bruning)
Tubercle Vaccine 0.0005 mgm
Tubercle Vaccine 0.0001 mgm.
Normal Horse Serum.
Tubercle, Moist, for opsonic estimation.
Staphylococcus Albus Vaccine,
Tubercle for conjunctival test.
Typhoid Bacillus Vaccine
Tetanus Anti Serum.

1912 Most states in the U.S. had passed laws permitting or requiring medical examinations before school matriculation. (REF: Colgrove, p 49). “Throughout the twentieth century, public education became widespread and cities quickly realized that the schoolhouse served as a locus of prevention. James Colgrove, author of State of Immunity: The Politics of Vaccination in Twentieth-Century America,  defined the evolution this way: ‘Although controversy over public health regulations was not uncommon during this period, vaccination provoked an especially vociferous response. Other regulations that limited individual liberty in order to protect the common good generally required that people refrain from an action or behavior. Vaccination, in contrast, required people to submit to a procedure, one that involved discomfort and whose safety and efficacy remained uncertain in the minds of many.’ (REF: Colgrove. p. 10). ‘The balance between the right of the individual and the good of the whole has long been a difficult dance. Since the beginning of mandatory vaccination programs, health officials have pressed individuals to participate through the use of several scripted arguments. These have included: Promoting the concept of herd immunity (an entire community will be protected if everyone is vaccinated); citing large epidemiological studies to minimize the number of injured in proportion to the numbers who have been vaccinated; and framing vaccination as a necessary act of a good citizen. Sometimes the arguments have been presented civilly, encouraging compliance through cooperation. But far too often, the approach has been coercive. At the turn of the twentieth century, medical education began to shift toward an emphasis on sickness. The belief was fostered that only experts could legitimately make health decisions and physicians were positioned as better qualified than parents to judge the well-being of children. One of the best opportunities for the state to intervene and assess children was prior to attending school, and by 1912 most states had passed laws permitting or requiring medical examinations before school matriculation.” REF: Colgrove, p 49.

1915-1918 Massachusetts legislators, boast about having the most forceful laws in the country, and they rejected annual appeals from 1915 to 1918 to repeal mandatory requirements. REF: “State of Immunity,” by James Colgrove. University of California Press, 2006. p. 64.

CONCOMITANTLY WITH COMPULSORY MILITARY VACCINATION AND HOW THIS FORCED VACCINE USHERED IN THE INFLUENZA ERA, THE DOCTRINE OF FEAR REGARDING “HEALTHY CARRIERS” OR HEALTHY SICK PEOPLE BEGINS IN FULL FORCE IN THE CONTEXT OF INEXPLICABLE PARALYSIS :

1916 The first American public health control programs begin during and following the Great 1916 Polio Epidemic. During this great and feared 1916 “polio epidemic” that began only four years after mandatory vaccinations were implemented for the military in the United States in 1911, we find in retrospect fears of contagion and catechisms regarding disease arrogantly being asserted as fact for the first time in its recognizable modern form.

For example, both before and during the 1916 epidemic, and still today, nobody could figure out why both rich and poor individuals contracted paralysis. Nobody could explain why both the well-fed and the hungry became paralyzed, or why acute flaccid paralysis prevalence was higher among gentiles than the “unwashed immigrants,” or why both those who swam in public pools, and those who didn’t, contracted paralysis. Fear turned into public health campaigns to enforce quarantines and fines for those who kept their windows open or who failed to maintain their living quarter environs as clean as possible to ward off an imagined fly vector.

Public health officials, and medical “scientists” (like Flexner who believed polio to be spread through the air) couldn’t explain why rich Philadelphia playboys and orphans of the state would both contract paralysis, or how only one individual out of a family of many children acquired paralysis. It was written by some historians that more spinal taps were performed during that era than could be counted, and “exsanguinations” of cerebral spinal fluid, or mercury injected into the spinal fluid were thought to reduce the symptoms of paralysis.

For lack of a consistent causal association for transmission of paralysis,  and the fact that many more folks also appeared to “have it” or “carry it” that never so much as developed the sniffles-the only thing that was left for public health authorities, and the academic scientists and physicians to hypothesize, after all of these hypotheses (and others) failed to quell the occurrence of paralysis during the summertime, was the idea of a “healthy carrier state.”

1917 U.S. soldiers are vaccinated prior to going overseas to fight in WW I. They soon begin to “drop dead by the thousands” from a strange syndrome that preferentially attacked young adults.

1918 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY — NAVAL HISTORICAL CENTER 805 KIDDER BREESESE — WASHINGTON NAVY YARD WASHINGTON DC in a report entitled, “The Pandemic of Influenza in 1918-1919” prepared by the US Department of Health, Education and Welfare Public Health Service National Office of Vital Statistics indicates that the extraordinary feature of “the Great Spanish flu” was that it attacked young people in the prime of life unlike any other epidemics recorded (accept AIDS-my emphasis):

“The pandemic of influenza in 1918-19 which swept over nearly every continent and island of the whole globe has been described as one of the great human catastrophies. There are excellent descriptions of epidemics and pandemics as far back as the year 1500, and various records of epidemics since the 1918-19 holocaust. Many of them were relatively mild infections, while others were severe, but none of them showed the extraordinary high mortality in young adults that characterized the 1918-19 pandemic and its aftermath in 1920. The greatest amount of mortality in epidemics prior to and subsequent to 1918-19 was found in children under 1 year of age and in persons 65 years and over.”

“Frost, in one of his reports, pointed out that influenza and pneumonia mortality rose sharply in some cities in the United States in December 1915 and January 1916, which may or may not have been related to the 1918 epidemic. In January 1916, influenza was reported to be epidemic in 22 States, but it was described as a mild type of illness.”

“As early as December 1917, influenza was prevalent in Camp Kearny, California, and in other Army camps in January 1918, but the disease was said to be mild. In the spring, localized outbreaks occurred in the civilian population of the United States, and mortality from pneumonia rose sharply in certain cities. In March and April, Camp Funston, Kansas, experienced three waves of influenza. The first two affected all types of personnel, and the third, which occurred late in April, was predominantly in recruits who arrived shortly after the second wave. Mild epidemics of influenza were reported in various localities in Western Europe in April and May of 1918, and in June and July more extensive outbreaks occurred in Great Britain and in Europe, China, India, the Philippine Islands, and Brazil. In these countries, mortality rose moderately. The 1918-19 epidemic was often referred to in the United States as “Spanish influenza,” but there is no reason to believe that it originated in Spain. Indeed the occurrence of influenza in the United States in the spring of 1918 may have preceded that which occurred in Spain.”

“During August 1918, epidemics of influenza were reported in Greece, Sweden, Switzerland, Spain, the West Indies, and late in the month it appeared almost simultaneously in Camp Shelby, Mississippi, and Boston, Massachusetts. In September, it appeared in rapid succession in other Army camps and in the civilian population along the Atlantic seaboard and the Gulf of Mexico and spread rapidly westward over the country. By October, the epidemic had involved the entire United States, except isolated places and some mountain areas. The interval between the peaks of the epidemic in Boston and San Francisco was about 4 weeks, and the peaks in the number of deaths usually were reached in about 1 month following the beginning of the epidemic in a community or area. As a rule, epidemics affected rural areas later than cities in the same sections. In some areas there was a recrudescence of the epidemic in January and February 1919, which was most marked in cities where the autumn epidemic was less severe. Thus the influenza epidemic of 1918-19 in the United States was characterized by a relatively mild phase in the spring of 1918, an explosive outbreak with high mortality in the fall, and a third phase or recrudescence early in 1919.”

“The incidence and mortality of influenza in military personnel in 1918-19 has been described in great detail in Epidemiology and Public Health by Vaughan, and in Volume 9 of the history of the Medical Department of the United States Army in the World War. [See also the Surgeon General’s account in Annual Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 1919 — Miscellaneous Reports]. About 90 percent of the men in military service in World War I were young adults between 20 and 35 years of age. Consequently, the Armed Forces were seriously affected, as were the same age groups in the civilian population. In the Army over a million men were hospitalized for influenza and pneumonia, and of these there were more than 44,000 deaths. There were approximately 5,000 deaths among Navy personnel. Hospital admission rates and death rates for American troops stationed in Europe were lower than for troops in the United States. The large number of recruits concentrated in close quarters probably accounted for higher rates in the latter. In the camps having the larger numbers of trainees (recently vaccinated men?-my question), incidence and mortality was highest, and in all camps the rates were higher in recruits than in seasoned troops. The crowding in camps probably favored the spread of secondary invading organisms as well as the etiologic agent of influenza (or was it their mandated recruitment vaccines-my question)? The peak of the epidemic was reached in September in Navy personnel and about the middle of October in the Army. A secondary rise in incidence of these respiratory diseases occurred in the Army in January and February 1919, but it was limited to troops stationed in Europe.”

“When appropriate adjustments are made for differences in the age and sex distribution of military and civilian populations, it appears that the death rate was about one-fourth higher in the Army than in the civilian population of the United States. It is reasonable to assume that this difference was largely due to greater crowding in the recruit population of the Army. Collins showed mortality rates from influenza and pneumonia by age in 1918 as compared with certain other years. The relatively high mortality in young adults in 1918 and the 2 years immediately following seems to have been characteristic of that period and was not found in epidemics prior to or subsequent to this 3-year period.”

In the account of survivor of the “Great Spanish Flu,” Elenor McBean, the following is claimed: E. McBean (Vaccination The Silent Killer p28) (Source: Dr. Rebecca Carley):

“Very few people realize that the worst epidemic ever to hit America, the Spanish Influenza of 1918 was the after effect of the massive nation-wide vaccine campaign. The doctors told the people that the disease was caused by germs. Viruses were not known at that time or they would have been blamed. Germs, bacteria and viruses, along with bacilli and a few other invisible organisms are the scapegoats, which the doctors like to blame for the things they do not understand. If the doctor makes a wrong diagnosis and treatment, and kills the patient, he can always blame it on the germs, and say the patient didn’t get an early diagnosis and come to him in time.”

“If we check back in history to that 1918 flu period, we will see that it suddenly struck just after the end of World War I when our soldiers were returning home from overseas. That was the first war in which all the known vaccines were forced on all the servicemen. This mish-mash of poison drugs and putrid protein of which the vaccines were composed, caused such widespread disease and death among the soldiers that it was the common talk of the day, that more of our men were being killed by medical shots than by enemy shots from guns. Thousands were invalided home or to military hospitals, as hopeless wrecks, before they ever saw a day of battle. The death and disease rate among the vaccinated soldiers was four times higher than among the unvaccinated civilians. But this did not stop the vaccine promoters. Vaccine has always been big business, and so it was continued doggedly.”

“It was a shorter war than the vaccine-makers had planned on, only about a year for us, so the vaccine promoters had a lot of unused, spoiling vaccines left over which they wanted to sell at a good profit. So they did what they usually do, they called a meeting behind closed doors, and plotted the whole sordid program, a nationwide (worldwide) vaccination drive using all their vaccines, and telling the people that the soldiers were coming home with many dread diseases contracted in foreign countries and that it was the patriotic duty of every man, woman and child to get “protected” by rushing down to the vaccination centers and having all the shots.”

“Most people believe their doctors and government officials, and do what they say. The result was, that almost the entire population submitted to the shots without question, and it was only a matter of hours until people began dropping dead in agony, while many others collapsed with a disease of such virulence that no one had ever seen anything like it before. They had all the characteristics of the diseases they had been vaccinated against, the high fever, chills, pain, cramps, diarrhea, etc. of typhoid, and the pneumonia like lung and throat congestion of diphtheria and the vomiting, headache, weakness and misery of hepatitis from the jungle fever shots, and the outbreak of sores on the skin from the smallpox shots, along with paralysis from all the shots, etc.”

“The doctors were baffled, and claimed they didn’t know what caused the strange and deadly disease, and they certainly had no cure. They should have known the underlying cause was the vaccinations, because the same thing happened to the soldiers after they had their shots at camp. The typhoid fever shots caused a worse form of the disease, which they called para-typhoid. Then they tried to suppress the symptoms of that one with a stronger vaccine, which caused a still more serious disease, which killed and disabled a great many men. The combination of all the poison vaccines fermenting together in the body, caused such violent reactions that they could not cope with the situation. Disaster ran rampant in the camps. Some of the military hospitals were filled with nothing but paralyzed soldiers, and they were called war casualties, even before they left American soil. I talked to some of the survivors of that vaccine onslaught when they returned home after the war, and they told of the horrors, not of the war itself, and battles, but of the sickness at camp.  The doctors didn’t want this massive vaccine disease to reflect on them, so they agreed among themselves to call it Spanish Influenza. Spain was a far away place and some of the soldiers had been there, so the idea of calling it Spanish Influenza seemed to be a good way to lay the blame on someone else. The Spanish resented having us name the world scourge on them. They knew the flu didn’t originate in their country.”

“20,000,000 died of that flu epidemic, worldwide, and it seemed to be almost universal or as far away as the vaccinations reached. Greece and a few other countries, which did not accept the vaccines, were the only ones that were not hit by the flu. Doesn’t that prove something?”

“At home (in the U.S.) the situation was the same; the only ones who escaped the influenza were those who had refused the vaccinations. My family and 1 were among the few who persisted in refusing the high pressure sales propaganda, and none of us had the flu not even a sniffle, in spite of the fact that it was all around us, and in the bitter cold of winter.”

“Everyone seemed to have it. The whole town was down sick and dying. The hospitals were closed because the doctors and nurses were down with the flu. Everything was closed, schools, businesses, post office everything. No one was on the streets. It was like a ghost town. There were no doctors to care for the sick, so my parents went from house to house doing what they could to help the stricken in any way they could. They spent all day and part of the night for weeks, in the sick rooms, and came home only to eat and sleep. If germs or viruses, bacteria, or any other little organisms were the cause of that disease, they had plenty of opportunity to latch onto my parents and ‘lay them low’ with the disease that had prostrated the world. But germs were not the cause of that or any other disease, so they didn’t ‘catch’ it. I have talked to a few other people since that time, who said they escaped the 1918 flu, so I asked if they had the shots, and in every case, they said they had never believed in shots and had never had any of them. Common sense tells us that all those toxic vaccines all mixed up together in people, could not help but cause extreme body-poisoning and poisoning of some kind or another is usually the cause of disease.”

“Whenever a person coughs or sneezes, most people cringe, thinking that the germs are being spread around in the air and will attack people. There is no need to fear those germs any more, because that is not the way colds are developed. Germs can’t live apart from the cells (host) and can’t do harm anyway, even if they wanted to. They have no teeth to bite anyone, no poison pouches like snakes, mosquitoes or bees, and do not multiply, except in decomposed substances, so they are helpless to harm. As stated before, their purpose is useful, not destructive.”

“The 1918 flu was the most devastating disease we ever had, and it brought forth all the medical bag of tricks to quell it, but those added drugs, all of which are poisons, only intensified the over-poisoned condition of the people, so the treatments actually killed more than the flu did.” These excerpts are from Vaccination The Silent Killer: Honorof, Ida and McBean, E.: Vaccination the silent killer (U.S.A.) Honor Publications, P.O. Box 346, Cutten, CA 95534, U.S.A. http://www.whale.to/vaccines/books.html

Other accounts and records recorded the following information regarding the Great “Spanish Flu:”

“It has been estimated that there were about 20,000,000 cases of influenza and pneumonia in the United States in 1918-19, with approximately 850,000 deaths. In 1918 alone, 464,959 deaths from influenza and pneumonia were registered in the registration States and the District of Columbia as compared with 115,526 in 1917. This includes deaths in the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps which occurred in registration States. Eighty percent of the deaths in 1918 occurred in the last 4 months of the year.”

“The numbers of deaths from influenza and pneumonia by age in registration States in 1917, 1918, and 1919 are shown in the table below.  A number of States in which Army camps were located are not included in this table, so a considerable number of deaths of civilians and of military personnel for 1918-19 are missing which accounts for the difference in an estimated total of 850,000 for the United States and the figure of 650,399 for the registration States. In 1918 the death rate for males was 669.0 per 100,000 population; for females, 507.5. At ages 25 to 34, the rate was 1,216.6 for males and 781.4 for females. These excessively high mortality rates profoundly influenced the estimated average length of life calculated for the year 1918. It was reduced 24 percent from 1917 to 1918 for males and 22 percent for females. However, these estimated average lengths of life in years returned to their previous trends in 1920.”

Because the so-called epidemic didn’t behave according to rational “medical or biological rules” or hypotheses, an imagined filter-passing entity, called viruses, were proposed, but really never became established accept until decades later.

“Influenza and Pneumonia Mortality by Age: Death-Registration States, 1917-19
(For 1917, area includes 27 States and the District of Columbia; for 1918, 30 States and the district of Columbia; and for 1919, 33 States and the District of Columbia)”:

Year 1917 1918 1919

Age                                                      Number of deaths
All ages                             115,526                      464,959                 185,440
Under 1 year                     22,207                       38,428                    27,736
1-4 years                            12,859                       49,699                      21,133
5-14 years                            3,319                        28,054                    10.598

Compulsory Military Vaccination Age Group Interval

15-24 years                         4,861                         78,158???               20,381
25-34 years                        6,915                       126,792???                32,159

35-44 years                        9,387                         60,902                     20,690
45-54 years                        10,652                        28,596                    14,043
55-64 years                         12,571                        19,632                     12,530
65-74 years                         14,771                        17,643                     13,065
75-84 years                         13,224                       11,829                        9,548
85 years and over               4,600                         3,680                         3,173
Not stated                               160                         1,546                            384

Unlike any influenza or disease in history, the so-called “Great Spanish Flu,” whatever caused theses numbers to occur, killed young male adults preferentially in their prime (as designated by question marks) similar to the so-called AIDS epidemic of the 1980’s, sparing infants and the aged, the typical targets of seasonal influenza-like syndromes. Could the compulsory vaccine campaigns upon entering the military account for these numbers?

THE CAUSE OF THE GREATEST DISEASE IN HUMAN HISTORY REMAINS UNKNOWN, BUT IS BELIEVED DUE TO VACCINATION, WAR AND BACTERIA:

“Pfeiffer isolated an organism in 1892 variously referred to as Pfeiffer bacillus or influenza bacillus which was accepted by many as the causative agent of influenza. However, in 1918, various observers failed to find this organism in many cases, antemortem or postmortem. A report on sputum cultures taken from 47 individuals in Baltimore during the epidemic showed that streptococci were present in 24 sputums, staphylococcus in 1, pneumococcus in 15, and the influenza bacillus in 8. In cultures taken in various Army camps prior to and during the epidemic of influenza in the fall of 1918, varying proportions of persons were found to carry streptococci, pneumococci, and the Pfeiffer bacilli. Such variations were also found in cultures from the bronchi or lungs at autopsy, and differences were found from camp to camp. The proportion of persons carrying streptococci or some other secondary invader did not remain constant, being replaced from time to time by another bacterium.”

“It was the impression of many in 1918 that an unrecognized virus was the primary cause of influenza and that the streptococci, pneumococci, and influenza bacilli were secondary invaders which might be termed “bacterial hitch-hikers.” Attempts by two groups of investigators to transmit the infection by nasal instillation of filtered and unfiltered secretions from influenza cases in human volunteers were not successful. Nor could they produce influenza in the volunteers by nasal instillations with Pfeiffer bacilli.”

Prevention and Control
“It often happens that when a severe outbreak of a disease occurs many measures are applied, some of which appear to be extreme and dictated by panic. In 1918, which was no exception, isolation of cases and quarantine of contacts were applied vigorously in some areas, but there is little evidence to indicate that these measures were successful in preventing introduction or spread of the disease. Closure of schools and prohibition of public gatherings likewise were of doubtful value. The use of face masks to protect the wearer against infection had its advocates. The use of germicidal gases to destroy the organism was suggested. The use of a vaccine containing the influenza bacillus was advocated, but as one would expect, no value could be demonstrated. If a vaccine containing the viruses now known to cause the disease had been made available early in the epidemic, it is doubtful whether it would have been effective, since the epidemic in the fall of 1918 spread with great rapidity.”

“In 1922, Victor Gaughan stated in retrospect that the most reasonable administrative action that could have been taken was to direct efforts toward relief measures, namely, medical and nursing care and hospitalization.”

Much of the descriptive material and charts on the 1918-19 epidemic used in this comprehensive Department of Navy report were obtained from published reports or books by W.H. Frost, Edgar Sydenstricker, Victor Vaughan, and Eugene Opie. The publications of Selwyn Collins were a valuable source of information on characteristics of epidemics of influenza in the United States prior to and subsequent to 1918.

1918 Pathologists became intimately familiar with the condition of lungs of victims of bacterial pneumonia at autopsy. But the viral pneumonias caused by the influenza pandemic were so violent that many investigators said the only lungs they had seen that resembled them were from victims of poison gas.

1919 Despite the Supreme Court’s emphasis on protecting the “greater good,” North Dakota enacted laws expressly forbidding the passage of any mandatory vaccination requirements.

1919 Washington and in 1920 Wisconsin repeal mandatory requirements and replace them with personal belief exemptions.

1920’s By the 1920s, health officials began to use newly developed marketing techniques to promote the importance of vaccination and encourage cooperation. Vaccination programs appealed to the emotions of parents to motivate them to comply. Fear and guilt were used to characterize parents who did not vaccinate as nonconformists and neglectful. Charged language emphasized, and often magnified, the risk of the illness to portray the benefit of vaccines. These techniques were successful: During this period, roughly 80 percent of all students received all doses of recommended vaccines prior to school entry—an all-time high. (REF: CDC. Estimated Vaccination Coverage with Individual Vaccines and Selected Vaccination Series. US, National Immunization Survey, 2006).

1921 Franklin D. Roosevelt develops paralysis after swimming in Bay of Fundy, NewBrunswick.

1924 Infantile Paralysis records in Vermont reported that dogs and fowl in the area were also stricken, and that humans with the lowest fevers died more often. An excellent account of the polio era leading up to the Great 1916 “polio epidemic” can be found in “Infantile Paralysis in Vermont,” published in 1924 by The Burlington Vermont State Department of Public Health. This “record” is a collection of yearly maps of Vermont, compiled by Dr. Charles Solomon Caverly. The book begins with a description of a paralytic outbreak that took place in the summer of 1894, and a series of maps of Vermont then is provided where each recorded case was marked on the map with a red dot to note the location of the victim. Not only did each year’s map record every reported case of paralysis that occurred, and where in the state each case occurred (by county), detailed information about each case was also provided by Dr. Caverly-the ethnic background of the family, the employment status and line of work of the head of the household, the time of year it was reported, the temperature and weather at the time of diagnosis, the amount of rainfall measured, how the paralysis became manifested (and in which limb(s), how many days the incubation period likely lasted before paralysis was first observed (typically no longer than several days), and dozens of other interesting facts that Caverly recorded about each case. At the end of each chapter in The Record, Caverly speculated about each year’s case clusters, as to how paralysis and reported cases could possibly “travel” infectiously from county to county from the previous year, in an attempt to discover how “paralysis” cases spread (along train routes, roadway routes, water routes, etc). But there appeared to be no railroad lines, or roads, rivers, natural barriers such as mountains, or any other reason to account for how one year, 1910 for instance, higher clusters of paralysis occurred on one side of a mountain valley while the next year, the other side of the mountain and across the state was where the new cases occurred, while no new cases occurred again in the first place, and even though the mountains would have restricted spread, by limiting travel of “infected healthy carriers” or paralyzed individuals alike.

1928 The question of encephalitis following vaccination was investigated by the health organization of the League of Nations in 1928, and on August 27 that year, at Geneva, the League published a report on the situation. Says the report: “The post-vaccinal encephalitis with which we are dealing has become a problem of itself mainly in consequence of the events of the last few years in the Netherlands, England and Wales. In each of these countries, the cases which have occurred have been sufficiently numerous and similar to require them to be considered collectively. Their occurrence has led to the realization that a new, or at least previously unsuspected or unrecognized risk attaches to vaccination. . . the risk has, in the Netherlands, been considered of sufficient gravity to cause the temporary suspension of the administrative measures by which the vaccination of children has been secured, while in England the subject has already received the attention of two expert committees, appointed by the Ministry of Health.”

1931 Lubeck, Germany, 75 children die in from pediatrician’s experiment with tuberculosis vaccine.

1937 The official Journal of the American Medical Association on April 2, 1937: “A multiplicity of untoward sequelae have been observed in patients treated with immune serum. . .The common symptomatology includes fever, urticaria, erythema, oedema, lymphadenoma, artharaliga, smothering sensations, headache, nausea and vomiting. Occasionally there are more serious and lasting manifestations such as peripheral neuritis, epididymitis and orchitis.”

1937 The Philippines had the worst smallpox epidemic ever in the early 1900s even after a vaccination rate of 95 percent.Physician William Howard Hay’s address of June 25, 1937; printed in The Congressional Record.

1937 West Nile virus is said to originate from a black woman from the south Nile river delta in 1937 (Smithburn KC, Hughes TP, Burke AW, Paul JH. A neurotropic virus isolated from the blood of a native of Uganda. Am J Trop Med Hyg; 20:471-92, 1940), before the days of sucrose density gradient centrifugation combined with EM in order to demonstrate viral particles.  This would be the first of many viruses said to emerge from black persons…without any evidence…others would later include hepatitis B, “HIV,” and even “HPV.”

1938 the Lancet publishes a piece arguing:”That diphtheria can be prevented by immunization no more implies a command to immunize people than the fact that nitric acid and glycerine make an explosive mixture implies a command to blow up our neighbors. Yet the immunization of the masses is undertaken with almost religious fervor. The enthusiast rarely stopped to wonder where it would all finish or whether the fulsome promises made to the public in the form of ‘propaganda’ would ever be honored.Those who have had to take detailed notice of immunization accidents of the past few years know that to get the truth of what really went wrong generally calls for the resources of something like a secret service. Immunization surely should remain a matter of private, not of public venture—a question for the individual to decide on personal grounds and in term of his own risks, fears and prejudices.”

1940’s During the 1940’s, advertisements appeared in American magazines showing cartoons of huge house-flies attacking babies as they slept in their cribs, as it was still thought in the 1940’s that flies were still perhaps the most likely source of paralysis. DDT was then developed to spray everything, including the household kitchen and the food supply, when it wasn’t yet appreciated that DDT and other pesticides such as arsenic used at the turn of the century in the orchards scattered about New England induced the same pathological damage to the same areas of nerve tissue that was and is characteristic of that now assumed to be infection-acquired paralysis from a virus.

1941 In the April, 1941, issue of the Naval Medical Bulletin, reporting on the results of tests on 20,000 recruits at the Naval Training Station at San Diego, California, between July, 1939, and January, 1941, Captain G. E. Thomas of the Medical Corps of the Navy tells the story. He describes an experiment on these men. “All had been checked by all known means and found free of syphilis, and were then confined. These men were vaccinated against smallpox. Those who did not show ‘successful’ vaccination were re-vaccinated. The experiment showed that more of these developed syphilis from the smallpox vaccination than the percentage who developed syphilis from all causes in the civilian population in the United States.”

1941 “On the eve of US entry into World War II, concern about a repeat of the 1918 influenza pandemic and its effect on armed forces led the US military to establish the Commission on Influenza (later combined with other commissions to become the present Armed Forces Epidemiological Board) and place high priority on developing a vaccine” (Woodward TE, editor. The histories of the commissions. Washington: Office of The Surgeon General; 1992). “Pandemic influenza did not materialize, but the vaccine did. The first successful large-scale influenza vaccine field trials were completed in 1943” (Francis T. Vaccination against influenza. In: World Health Organization. Influenza, a review of current research. Geneva: The Organization; 1954. p. 689–740). “In 1947, failure of the vaccine to provide protection against the epidemic influenza type A antigenic variant confirmed concerns of vaccine obsolescence and led to the term ‘antigenic shift‘ ” (von Magnus P. The influenza virus: its morphology, immunology, and kinetics of multiplication. Bull World Health Organ. 1953;8:647–60) “and designation of the 1947 FM1 strain by the Commission on Influenza as subgroup A´ on the basis of the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test.”

1942 A report of the US Secretary of War, Henry L. Simpson regarding the deaths from yellow fever shots stated that: “Recent Army experience with yellow fever vaccine resulted in 28,505 cases of hepatitis with 62 deaths.”

1944 Pertussis vaccine recommended for universal use in infants.

1944 M. Meadow Bayly, M.R.C.S., British authority on immunology, and author of the book, The Schick Inoculation Against Diphtheria, writes in 1944: “Perhaps the greatest evil of immunization lies in its diversion of public attention from true methods of disease prevention. It encourages public authorities to permit all kinds of sanitary defects and social problems to remain undressed, particularly in schools. It ignores the part played by food and sunlight and many other factors in the maintenance of health. It exaggerates the risk of diphtheria and works upon the fear of parents. The more it is supported by public authorities, the more will its dangers and disadvantages be concealed or denied. The pitfalls connected with a comparison of inoculated with uninoculated groups are well known to statisticians and have been emphasized in the medical press; the importance of seeing that the two groups are comparable in all other respects has been entirely ignored in the official statements issued. Our belief that we can attain prevention from diseases originating in filth by injecting toxic substances into the body, has made public authorities in many American cities callous to the demands for ordinances and regulations providing pure milk, ice cream, meat, and other foods.”

1944 Albert Sabin reports that a major cause of sickness and death of American troops based in the Philippines was poliomyelitis. US military camps there were sprayed daily with DDT to kill mosquitoes. Neighboring Philippine settlements were not affected.

1944 NIH reports that DDT damages the same anterior horn cells that are damaged in infantile paralysis.

1946 Gebhaedt shows polio seasonality correlates with fruit harvest.

1947 MacCallum publishes research suggesting a virus is the causative agent for serum hepatitis (MacCallum, F.O., Homologous serum hepatitis. Lancet 2, 691, (1947).

1947 DPT (tri-valent diphtheria/pertussis/tetanus) recommended by the AAP (American Association of Pediatrics) for routine use.

1948 The Vaccination Inquirer reports that the English and Scottish Health Ministers acknowledged more than 25,000 cases of diphtheria in immunized children from 1941 to 1945, with nearly 200 deaths in immunized children. The clinical picture of diphtheria immunization is brought up-to-date by the Journal of the American Medical Association for June 5, 1948, in an article entitled, “Danger of Vaccination and Inoculation:”

“If intradermal tests are used, one should be sure that the tests are preceded by a negative reaction to a scratch test in order to avoid generalized reactions, which may be serious and which may even, on rare occasions, result in the death of a highly sensitive child. Allergic children should be given prophylactic treatment for diphtheria, pertussin and tetanus. . .Hypo-immunization against pertussin (whooping cough) is important because respiratory allergies are likely to develop in an allergic child. If whooping cough does develop, it should be combated with human immune globulin or hyper-immune human serum.”

1948 Dalldorf and Sickles took excrement from a paralysis victim and prepared a 20% suspension with ether and centrifugation, then injected it directly into the living brains of suckling mice 3-7 days old. The mice became paralyzed.

1949 Enders of Harvard claims he can make this ‘virus’ from human embryonic cells,
making it far easier to make a vaccine. Their conclusion was that this was the successful isolation of a virus that must be causing polio paralysis in humans. But all they proved was that a faeces-derived suspension of human cellular material caused illness in lab animals when injected into their brains. They called this suspension ‘poliovirus’ and it was to become a ‘vaccine seed’ for modern polio vaccines. Enders received the 1954 Nobel Prize.

1949 Endocrinologist Dr Morton Biskind, a practitioner and medical researcher, found that DDT causes ‘lesions in the spinal cord similar to human polio.’

1950 Dr. Joseph Stokes of the University of Pennsylvania infects 200 women prisoners with viral hepatitis.

1950 US Public Health Industrial Hygiene Medical Director, J.G. Townsend, notes the similarity between parathion poisoning and polio and believes that some polio might be caused by eating fruits or vegetables with parathion residues.

1950’s “Starting in the 1950s Africans experienced a massive increase in medical injections associated with mass injection campaigns targeted at yaws, with introduction and spread of parenteral therapies to treat other diseases, and with plummeting prices for antibiotics and injection equipment. For example, UNICEF administered 12 million injections for yaws in Central Africa alone during 1952-57. From the 1950s into the 1980s, unsafe injections may have contributed to the silent spread of HIV in Africa in much the same way that unsafe injections for schistosomiasis and other treatments in Egypt established hepatitis C as a major blood-borne pathogen, infecting about 15% to 20% of the general population at the end of the 1990s” (Editorial with Gisselquist, statistics quoted from: International Journal of STD & AIDS Royal Society of Medicine, October 2002 Africa HIV/AIDS through unsafe medical care. Also available: Africa Policy E-Journal. http://www.africaaction.org/docs02/hiv0210t.htm.)

1950 A small nanometer-sized ball-like particle, 24-30 nm in size, was isolated from human excrement, and made visible for the first time with an electron microscope. It was named the ‘poliovirus.’ There was and still is no evidence that the ball-like particle causes paralysis.

1950s –1972 Mentally disabled children at Willowbrook School (NY) were deliberately infected with hepatitis in an attempt to find a vaccine. Participation in the study was a condition for admission to the institution.

1950 (September) Ralph R. Scobey, M.D., president of the Poliomyelitis Research Institute. Inc. Syracuse, New York (Archives of Pediatrics, Sept. 1950) lists 170 diseases of polio-like symptoms and effects but with different names such as: epidemic cholera, cholera morbus, spinal meningitis, spinal apoplexy, inhibitory palsy, intermittent fever, famine fever, worm fever, bilious remittent fever, ergotism, and others. There are also such common nutritional deficiency diseases as beriberi, scurvy, Asiatic plague, pellagra, prison edema, acidosis, and others. “No drugs, medicines or medical treatments have ever been able to cure any of these diseases and no germs have been isolated as the cause. But they all respond to fasting, cleansing, proper diet and improved circulation. The similarity of these diseases to polio is too obvious to go unnoticed. They are, in reality, all one disease with varying stages of intensity and different names. It is ridiculous to assume that polio is caused by a virus and the rest of them are caused by nutritional deficiency. Inasmuch as nerve cells react in much the same way to various poisons, further research will probably show that in these cases polio micro-organisms are not always present, but intoxication (poisoning) may be produced through faulty metabolism or by the absorption of poisons from without” (Ralph Scobey, 1950).

HOW CERVICAL CANCER CELLS CHANGED THE WORLD AND HELPED WIN THE BIOLOGICAL ARMS RACE

1950’s and early 60’s During the 1950’s, the third major push for a polio vaccine that might prevent rare childhood paralysis became coupled to the unsubstantiated belief that a virus also must be a cause of human cancers with renewed vigor after the Second World War. Oddly, some of the cells first used to try to grow the intestine-derived polio “agent” were cancerous cervical tissue cells, cells that became to be known as HeLa cells. The idea also was advanced at about this time that suspected human cancer viruses also could be immunized against to rid cancer from the face of the world via vaccinations made against them.

This belief in the existence of human cancer viruses during the 1950’s polio era helped shape a campaign to launch a “War On Cancer” during the 1960’s and 1970’s. This initiative was begun by Mary Lasker, Mathilde Krim, and others. They had close personal connections to the most powerful political circles inside of Washington, and also to Hollywood and to the Hollywood stars. Mary Lasker was the wife of a prominent New York businessman who had died of cancer, Albert D. Lasker, while Mathilde Krim had married the director of Orion Pictures who also had developed countless connections in both Hollywood and in Washington D.C.

In 1956, the Albert and Mary Lasker Foundation, Inc., along with George Gund, the George Gund Foundation, and David M. Levy, funded the James Stevens Simmons Memorial Fund at the Harvard School of Public Health. (Gifts to Harvard, January 1 to March 31, 1956. Nathan March Pusey. ctr/50001545-1580.) Simmons was the Dean of the Harvard School of Public Health from 1946 to his death in 1954. From 1940 to 1946, he was a founder of The Armed Forces Epidemiological Board,” with then-Colonel Stanhope Bayne-Jones as his executive assistant. (The Genesis of the Board for the Investigation and Control of Influenza and Other Epidemic Diseases in the Military. US Army-History ofthe National Cancer Institute’s Viruses and Cancer Programs / National Institutes of Health (pdf, 379pp).

Members of the NACC in 1958 were Lane Adams of the American Cancer Society; Dr. Murray M. Copeland; Dr. Charles A. Evans; Dr. Henry S. Kaplan; Mrs. Mary W. (Albert D.) Lasker; Dr. Robert A. Moore; Dr. Isidor S. Ravdin; Dr. Leo G. Rigler; Dr. Joseph F. Ross; Dr. Harold P. Rusch; Dr. Richard S. Schreiber; Dr. Howard E. Skipper; Dr. Warren Weaver; Mr. James E. Webb; and Dr. Sidney Weinhouse. Bayne-Jones was a member of the National Advisory Cancer Council from 1959 to 1961, and had maintained ties with his Yale “skull and cross-bones” connections thereafter for many years, such as some of the members of the President’s Cancer Panel, 1976, and National Advisory Cancer Council, 1957-71 (J Natl Cancer Inst 1977 Aug;59 (2suppl):763), and The President’s Cancer Panel (J. Natl. Cancer Inst 1977 / tobacco document). Colonel Bayne-Jones was appointed to the Surgeon General’s Advisory Committee on Smoking and Health (US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Press Release, Nov. 11, 1962). Colonel Bayne-Jones acted as their quasi-chairman and was senior most member, and he’d been administrator as Yale medical school dean: he was ‘the father figure’ for the group” (Richard Kluger’s notes for “Ashes to Ashes,” interview of SGAC member Leonard M. Schuman, public health epidemiologist from University of Minnesota; July 15, 1988). Mary W. Lasker’s friend Florence Mahoney had close ties to President Kennedy.

These people, and their connections and beliefs served to codify much of what has become the modern “science” and views of cancer viruses that still are prevalent today. Study of their initiatives and world views reveals that their sociological, militaristic, philanthropic, and cultural views were of influence equal to, and arguably far exceeding, any scientific hypotheses or theories about cancer biology, as will become clear by consideration of the following information.

Scientifically,” there was a strong influence from Dr. Mathilde Krim, who was not only instrumental in establishing a “war on cancer” but also among the first and most vocal to found AmFAR during the AIDS era (the American Foundation for AIDS research that was ideologically conceived of and begun under similar pretenses and fanfare as the launching of the War On Cancer, including the recruitment of Hollywood stars and producers). Along with Mary Lasker, Krim first convinced Lyndon Johnson of the importance of defeating the virus she believed might cause human cancers based on no evidence that one existed in the first place, as Rous recounted in his 1966 Nobel lecture. Early in Nixon’s regime, Lasker and Krim finally triumphed and convinced the president, and other heads of State, to direct hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money to rid the world of cancer. (It is interesting to note that AmFAR is similarly now directed by the shoe-salesman and fashion magnate, Richard Cole). With her “Human Cancer Virus Program” now funded and erected to identify and contain the first imagined “human cancer virus” believed to transform normal cells into cancerous ones, and then to develop a vaccine against it, Krim and her cancer virus theorizing promised to make the world cancer free. Nixon’s administration then erected the intensely funded Special Cancer Virus Program, along with its special buildings created to contain that cancer virus when, and if, it ever was found. It was a venture Christened by Nixon as an initiative similar to splitting the atom or putting men on the moon. These political maneuvers also helped launch a new biological arms race during The Cold War between the Soviet Union and the U.S. About the same time, the Soviets were given a small collection of what the Americans believed were animal tumor viruses during a visit by a Soviet-American scientific delegation, and thus the Soviets were thus made aware that the race was on to find “the first Human tumor virus” with all it could mean in terms of a biological arms race, or Sputnik-like competition.

1950 Dr. Biskind presents evidence to the US Congress that pesticides were the major cause of polio epidemics. He is joined by Dr. Ralph Scobey who reported he found clear evidence of poisoning when analyzing chemical traces in the blood of polio victims.

1951 Scientists report they cannot find the designated polio virus in many polio (paralysis) victims.

1951 Dr. Biskind treats his polio patients as poisoning victims, removing toxins from food and environment, especially DDT contaminated milk and butter. Dr. Biskind writes: “Although young animals are more susceptible to the effects of DDT than adults, so far as the available literature is concerned, it does not appear that the effects of such concentrations on infants and children have even been considered.”

1951 Other doctors report they are having success treating polio (paralysis) with anti toxins used to treat poisoning, dimercaprol and ascorbic acid. Dr. F. R. Klenner reported: “In the poliomyelitis epidemic in North Carolina in 1948 60 cases of this disease came under our care… The treatment was massive doses of vitamin C every two to four hours. Children up to four years received vitamin C injection intramuscularly… All patients were clinically well after 72 hours.”

1951 The man who became most responsible for the view that poliomyelitis was contagious was Dr. Simon Flexner, author of the famous (or infamous) Flexner Report, which led the way to the closing of the naturopathic and homeopathic colleges in the United States. Said Flexner: “It was not easy to establish in an individual case precisely how the disease was acquired; it was difficult to bring evidence that was not at all convincing that this disease was contagious.” In discussing Flexner’s report, L. Emmett Holt stated: “Even five years ago, if anyone had suggested that the disease under discussion was an infectious or contagious one, it would have been looked upon as a joke” (Scobey, Archives of Pediatrics, May 1951).

1952 Prof Konstantine Vinodouroff of the Institute of Neurology, Russian Academy of Medical Science, tells the Americans that Russia has never had an outbreak of polio. The Americans are amazed.

1952 George Bernard Shaw said, “During the last considerable epidemic at the turn of the century [1900], I was a member of the Health Committee of London Borough Council, and I learned how the credit of vaccination is kept statistically by diagnosing all the revaccinated cases [of smallpox] as pustular eczema, varioloid or what not—except smallpox.”GBS, Further Extracts from His Writings, The Vaccination Inquirer, Sept. 1952.

1953 Dr. Kumm was appointed Director of Research of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (NFIP). The NFIP was funded by its “March of Dimes” program, and it sponsored the hasty development of the Salk vaccine in the early 1950s, at the height of the DDT/polio controversy. Dr. Kumm also “served as a civilian consultant to the Surgeon General . . . directing field studies of the use of DDT. . .” (American Journal of Digestive Diseases, 20:330, 1953).

1953 Clothes are moth-proofed by washing them in EQ-53, a formula containing DDT.

1953 Dr. Biskind wrote: “It was known by 1945 that DDT was stored in the body fat of mammals and appears in their milk… yet far from admitting a causal relationship between DDT and polio that is so obvious, which in any other field of biology would be instantly accepted, virtually the entire apparatus of communication, lay and scientific alike, has been devoted to denying, concealing, suppressing, distorting and attempts to convert into its opposite this overwhelming evidence. Libel, slander, and economic boycott have not been overlooked in this campaign.”

1954 Legislation recognizing the dangers of persistent pesticides is enacted, and a phase out of DDT in the US accelerates along with a shift of sales of DDT to third world countries. DDT is phased out at the same time as widespread polio vaccinations are about to begin.

1954 Dr. Jonas Salk developed the first commercial polio vaccine with a virus found in “the pooled feces of three healthly children in Cleveland (not paralysis victims). The ‘poliovaccine’ is administered to 400,000 US children. The official safety report stated that it protected ’30-90 percent’ of recipients. This was a vague statistic. However, manufacturers could make a 300% markup on the vaccine.”

1955 IPV (inactivated polio vaccine) licensed (was later modified in 1987).

1955 On April 24, 1955, an infant with paralysis was admitted to Michael Reese Hospital in Chicago, Illinois. The patient had been inoculated in the buttock with Cutter ‘polio’ vaccine on April 16, and developed flaccid paralysis of both legs on April 24.

1955 (May) “With the announcement that Cutter was withdrawing its vaccine, there ensued a nationwide panic. The AMA put out the warning to all its members to stop using Cutter’s ‘polio’ vaccine, although regrettably some doctors never received word. Many states and cities announced immediate cessation of mass immunizations, even though their vaccine had come from manufacturers other than Cutter. Local health departments began to track down every single dose of Cutter vaccine, which, it was soon discovered, had traversed the entire country. Throughout May and June, cases of polio caused by Cutter’s vaccine spread beyond the Far West and began to appear in every region of the country. The epicenter of the devastation was in California and the rural state of Idaho. Ninety-nine cases of polio would eventually be attributed to Cutter vaccine in California, with the incidence of polio among Cutter vaccinees exceeding the textbook definition of a wild polio epidemic by nearly threefold. In Idaho, with eighty-eight polio cases attributed to Cutter vaccine, the rate was fifteen times greater. Before it was over, the ‘Cutter incident,’ as it was euphemistically called in scientific circles, resulted in 260 people contracting polio and almost 200 cases of paralysis. Eleven people died. A devastating epidemic had been caused by two particularly bad batches of vaccine” (The Virus and The Vaccine-The True Story Of A Cancer -Causing Monkey Virus-Contaminated Polio Vaccine, And the Millions Of Americans Exposed, by Debbie Bookchin and Jim Schumacher, St. Martin’s Press, 2004).

1955 President Dwight Eisenhower awarded Salk the Congressional Medal declaring the polio vaccine a great victory for American science.

1956 Dr. Albert Sabin tests experimental polio vaccine on 133 prisoners in Ohio.

1956 Health Authorities change the rules for defining polio. Doctors are instructed to diagnose polio only if the patient has paralytic symptoms for 60 days or more. Milder cases of polio are no longer reported.

1957 “Canada suspended its distribution of Salk’s vaccine. By November all European countries had suspended distribution plans, apart from Denmark. By January 1957, 17 US states had stopped distributing the vaccine. The same year The New York Times reported that nearly 50 per cent of cases of infantile paralysis in children between the ages of five and 14 had occurred after vaccination” (Bookchin and Schumacker, 2004).

1957 Asian flu pandemic is claimed to kill 100,000 people, due to the “H2N2 influenza virus.”

1958 CDC changes the rules for defining polio again. Cases of inflammation of the membrane that protects the brain and spinal neuron cells, causing muscular weakness and pain, but not paralysis, are no longer to be classified as polio. These cases must now be called “viral or aseptic meningitis.” Non-paralytic cases were now to be re-named meningitis even if the poliovirus is present. The reported figures for polio were officially to exclude ‘cases of aseptic meningitis due to poliovirus or other enteroviruses.’ Reported cases of aseptic meningitis went from near zero to thousands, and polio cases dropped the same amount (following the introductions and widespread use of polio vaccines.

1958 Officials reduce the definition of polio again. Now all cases with classic polio paralytic symptoms are to be diagnosed initially as Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP). Two stools are taken from the patient and sent to the CDC to see if they canfind polio in them. If not, they are declared as not polio, even if the children have all the classic symptoms. Making fewer cases of polio by changing the definition was a fraudulent way to makeit seem like the polio vaccinations were working.

1958 Officials triumphantly declared large parts of the world polio free, even while the newly defined Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) suddenly became common. Credit for this great victory over disease was given to Salk, Sabin and the vaccine manufactures.

1959-1968 Quadrigen (DPT-IPV combo) used routinely (pulled off the market in1968 for safety and efficacy reasons).

1961 OPV (oral, live-virus Salk polio vaccine) licensed.

1961 Journal of the American Medical Association, Feb 25, 1961: “It is now generally recognized that much of the Salk vaccine used in the U.S. has been worthless.” Live strains produced by Sabin and put in sugar cubes were adopted instead.

1961 “Merck stopped shipping Purivax (its ‘purified’ version of the Salk vaccine) as soon as its own tests in May 1961 confirmed that the vaccine was contaminated with SV 40… Its unilateral withdrawal of vaccine from the market had not been well received by the DBS (Division of Biological Standards). If Merck recalled vaccine, then everyone else would have to. That would have resulted in public panic and would have run counter to the Technical Committee’s May 18 directive that polio vaccination ‘continue to be pursued with vigor with the materials presently available.’ In June, after the Girardi cancer results had come in, Hilleman (Merck’s science director) had tried one more time to get all vaccine production halted. That suggestion was rebuffed. Merck had already suspended production and was trying to figure out how to screen SV40 out of the vaccine when DBS tests on vaccine samples indicated that Parke-Davis supplies were also badly contaminated. Parke-Davis now also stopped vaccine manufacture. The truth was that by the time the Associated Press reported the ‘news’ in late July, both companies had not produced vaccine for several weeks. Parke Davis eventually resumed production, but Merck would soon decide that producing a polio vaccine that at times might be contaminated was not worth the risk.” (Bookchin and Schumacker, 2004).

1961 In 1961, the Food and Drug Administration ordered all vaccine manufacturers to screen out the SV40. One study suggests that Lederle did not do so. Kops, S.P., “Oral polio vaccine and human cancer: a reassessment of SV40 as a contaminant based upon legal documents, Anticancer Res 2000 Nov-Dec; 20(6C) :4745-9.

1962 “The Wistar human tissue study appeared in midsummer 1962, shortly before the human tissue study that Enders had completed at Hilleman’s urging. Enders and his collaborator, another Harvard researcher, Harvey Shein, reached essentially the same conclusions as the Wistar group, with a different kind of tissue, human kidney cells. Koprowski had rushed the Wistar study into press hoping to scoop Enders and gain some publicity for Wistar. But in the end, despite being second, the Enders study attracted a good deal more attention because it was published in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. A lengthy New York Times story on August 10, 1962, reported the Enders study:

‘A cancer-causing virus has for the first time produced cancer like changes in human cells… Changes that the virus produced in cultures of human kidney cells included greatly accelerated growth patterns and chromosomal aberrations…’

“By the fall of 1962, as news of the most recent SV40 research spread, the anxiety that had been growing in scientific circles about the simian virus rearched its zenith. ‘It was the worst thing in the world,’ Hayflick recalls of the news. ‘Please tell me: What else could we find worse in monkey kidney cells?’ In Britain, Wellcome Laboratories decided to stop inactivated vaccine production and switch entirely to live polio vaccine production.”

“As in the United States, however, both the British and Canadian governments decided not to recall old stocks of Salk vaccine. Britain had a surplus of 6 million injections in 1961. In Sweden, the concern was about Sabin-type vaccine. There were plans to give monkey gamma globulin to four thousand children who had received oral vaccine in the belief that it would contain antibodies against any simian viruses, including SV40, which might have contaminated the oral doses. In the Soviet Union, site of the most extensive use of Sabin’s vaccine, tests were conducted to determine the spread of SV40. Many of the technicians and scientists involved in Chumakov’s massive vaccination trial proved to have been infected by the virus, and the Soviets were now fearful of SV40’s possible long-term effects. Among American research and health officials, a joke with gallows-type humor began to make the rounds: The Soviets would lose the 1964 Olympics because their athletes would all have tumors thanks to SV40” (Bookchin and Schumacker, 2004).

1963 Measles vaccine licensed.

1963 The use of coercion to compel parents to vaccinate their children became particularly prevalent. A 1963 publication by the federal Communicable Disease Center, the original name for the CDC, contended that “the use of the word epidemic itself in public statements is the most effective single means of simulating the public to action.” That same year, the measles vaccine was approved for use in children. Shortly thereafter, a nationwide campaign to eradicate a national measles “epidemic” was spearheaded by the president of the Joseph P. Kennedy Foundation, Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy. To implement the vaccination strategy, a mixture of cooperative appeals and coercive school mandates were set in motion. REF: Achieving Public Response to Immunization Programs. (Referenced by Colgrove, pg 12).

1965 Baruch Blumberg working at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), discovered the Australia antigen (later known to be Hepatitis B surface antigen, or HBsAg) in the blood of healthy black Australian aboriginal people. (Alter HJ, Blumberg BS (1966). “Further studies on a “new” human isoprecipitin system (Australia antigen)”. Blood 27 (3): 297–309).

1959-1968 Quadrigen (DPT-IPV combo) used routinely pulled off the market in1968  for safety and efficacy reasons.

1968 Hong Kong flu pandemic is claimed to kill 700,000 people, due to the “H3N2 virus”. Both “H2N2” (1957 pandemic) and H3N2 are said to have likely arisen by exchange of genes between avian and human flu viruses, possibly following dual infection in humans.

1968 About half of the states had laws requiring vaccination for school attendance, but they were inconsistently enforced.

1969 Rubella vaccine licensed.

1970 The HEW reported in 1970 that as much as 26 percent of children receiving rubella vaccination, in national testing programs, developed arthalgia or arthritis. Many had to seek medical attention and some were hospitalised to test for rheumatic fever and rheumatoid arthritis. (Science, US, March 26, 1977.)

1970 Dane and others describe “virus-like particles” in serum of patients with Austrailia-Antigen-associated hepatitis. (Dane DS, Cameron CH, Briggs M (1970). “Virus-like particles in serum of patients with Australia-antigen-associated hepatitis”. Lancet 1 (7649): 695–8. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(70)90926-8 discovered the virus particle in 1970 by electron microscopy.

1971 MMR (tri-valent measles/mumps/rubella) licensed.

1972 U.S. ended routine use of smallpox vaccine.

1972 Jonas Salk, inventor of the IPV (inactivated polio vaccine), testified before a Senate subcommittee that nearly all polio outbreaks since 1961 were caused by the oral polio vaccine.

1975 Robert Gallo published a paper saying he had isolated a new human virus – human leukaemia virus 23 http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/javirus.htm.

“Gallo was jubilant, it was the justification for years of dedication. ‘We got permanently growing cell lines eventually, and it was a great eureka. We succeeded ten times in ten different cell lines, and we thought we had made the discovery, the genuine article, that retroviruses exist in humans. A year or more of analysis went by. We thought it was a triumph.”

“This period of research turned from being Gallo’s greatest triumph to date into his greatest disaster. When other scientists looked at this virus they discovered it was a mixture of three animal viruses: from a gibbon, a baboon and a woolly monkey.”

1976 Baruch Blumberg is credited with the discovery of the Au antigen, HbsAg in the blood of a black Australian aboriginal, and was awarded the Nobel Prize that he shared with NIH’s former Neurobiology Program director, D. Carlton Gajdusek—the discoverer of the so-called “slow virus” prion diseases, such as “kuru.”

According to most historical accounts, pediatrician and virologist Carlton Gajdusek became head of the laboratories for virological and neurological research at the NIH in 1958 and was inducted to the National Academy of Sciences in 1974 in the discipline of microbial biology. In the course of his research trips in the South Pacific, Gajdusek had brought 56 mostly male children back to live with him in the United States. As a strong proponent publicly of incest, Gajdusek was later accused by one of these boys he brought back, now an adult man, of molesting him as a child. Four of seven other boys now turned men recounted their relationships with Gadjusek on a 2009 BBC documentary as “the sex was untroubling” while for three of them they testified that “the sex was a shaming, abusive and a violation.” Gajdusek was charged with child molestation in April 1996, based on incriminating entries in his personal diary and statements from a victim. He pleaded guilty in 1997 and, under a plea bargain, was sentenced to 12 months in jail. After his release in 1998, he was permitted to serve his five-year unsupervised probation in Europe, and never returned to the U.S.

Despite the subtle character defects of Blumberg, with his obsession with transfusions and the blood of black persons, or Gajdusek and his love for young boys and public advocacy of incest, the doctors were jointly given The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1976 “for their discoveries concerning new mechanisms for the origin and dissemination of infectious diseases,” because the infectious agents and mechanisms of disease causation were believed not to conform to the standards of accepted pathogen isolation or of distinctive genetic (nucleic acid) identity in the case of both hepatitis B viral isolations or prions, or in the context of the timing of infection to demonstrable cell pathology or morbidity in the case of both prions and neurological syndromes, and hepatitis B in the context of liver cancer. The classic proofs of pathogenicity worked out by Koch were thrown out the window. For instance, Blumberg in a PNAS paper he wrote (see Sacrifice of the Virgins on this website) admitted not ever being able to isolate viral particles at the ultrastructural level or even transmit the disease in an animal model, while, D. Carlton Gajducek championed the idea that “infectious proteins” devoid of nucleic acids were at the basis of his slow, debilitating neurodegenerative disorders (e.g., kuru, CJD, Mad Cow, scrapie in sheep).

Importantly, both hepatocellular carcinoma or kuru-like syndromes were first characterized by an imagined but scientifically unproven extremely long latency periods after initial “infection.” In this regard, both liver cancers in the case of hepatitis B, or destruction of the brain tissue years or decades after “infection” with prion agents could “incubate” for as much as 30-40 years, before symptoms developed. And although the both the concepts of slow viruses, and pathogens devoid of nucleic acids were vigorously challenged and rejected by many in the scientific establishment during the 1980’s because these fantasies challenged the established biochemical chain of events worked out for all other known and well characterized infectious agents, and because these syndromes were touted by different studies to be both infectious and (genetically) run in families, Stanley Pruisner (in the context of prions) believed Gajducek’s hypotheses to be plausible anyway, and found that the hypothesized and molecularly unusual and difficult to detect disease-causing PRP protein was present in both diseased and healthy hamsters (for which another Nobel Prize was awarded to Pruisner).

1976 In a published report of the April 7, 1976, WHO meeting of international experts, the final paragraph urged extreme caution in developing live vaccines from a New Jersey strain, (H1N1) because of the possible danger of spread to susceptible human or animal hosts (World Health Organization. Influenza. Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 1976;51:123). That paragraph was written specifically to respond to reports that several investigators outside Western Europe had plans to develop and test such vaccines. One year later, an H1N1 virus, said to be identical to the laboratory strain from 1950–1951, swept the world.

1976 During the great swine flu hoax, President Ford is vaccinated before a TV audience of millions. More than 500 people receiving flu vaccinations become paralyzed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome who had been given a so-called swine flu vaccine that never was tested even in animals.

1979 A 16-minute segment of 60 minutes with Mike Wallace about the adverse effects and propaganda of the 1976 swine flu campaign is aired in which the then CDC Head, Dr. David Sencer, is interviewed (Dr. Sencer is now retired from working for a private industry job he obtained after being fired from the CDC: he can be heard defending his actions here (http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/04/30/swine.flu.1976/index.html), and he maintains as of April 2009 that he believed he “was doing the right thing” when he urged widespread vaccinations with an untested vaccine after an unconfirmed flu-like illness broke out among 5 soldiers at Fort Dix, New Jersey, after one of the 14 eventually diagnosed with the illness at the military base, a Private Lewis, died several days after he collapsed during a marching exercise. Sencer’s program was suspended after at least 25-32 people died from vaccine reactions, while about 500 others later suffered from Guillain-Barre syndrome. In this 60 Minutes Mike Wallace interview, it is clearly presented that although the initial “swine flu” vaccine was tested, the X53-a vaccine given to more than 40 million Americans never was tested. In the 16 minute documentary, a GBS patient also is interviewed whose life was ruined by the shot, footage is presented regarding the 1 soldier, Private Lewis, who collapsed while marching and who was revived by his commanding officer without that officer contracting any flu, and the statement is made that no confirmed cases of a flu variant was reported anywhere in the world before the CDC and the Federal Government decided to launch its vaccine campaign on some 40 million American lab rat recipients using an untested vaccine. That 16 minute part of 60 minutes with Mike Wallace and Dr. David Sencer can be seen here
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=7m92vldwbQaXdxDDVDGpp7Fc57K5CWw6 (If this link asks for a Keychain password to view it, simply click cancel and the video will come up).

1976 Bassili WR, Stewart GT. Published, “Epidemiological evaluation of immunisation and other factors in the control of whooping-cough.” Lancet 1976 Feb 28;1(7957):471-4: “The general incidence of whooping-cough is lower in fully immunised children, but present immunisation schedules do not adequately protect the infant below 1 year of age either from contracting infection or from its complications. In a recent outbreak in Glasgow, nearly one-third of notified cases were fully immunised. In Glasgow and probably in the U.K. as a whole, the persistance of whooping-cough in some areas is more strongly correlated with adverse socio-economic conditions than with lack of immunisation. The decline in recent years could be attributable to improvement in these conditions at least as much as to immunisation. There is no epidemiological justification for continuing mass immunisation, but there is a strong case for an intensified eradication policy which might include selective immunisation in high-risk groups and areas.”

1977 “Vaccination against whooping-cough. Efficacy versus risks” (The Lancet, vol. 1, January 29, 1977, pp. 234-7): “Calculations based on the mortality of whooping-cough before 1957 predict accurately the subsequent decline and the present low mortality… Incidence [is] unaffected either by small-scale vaccination beginning about 1948 or by nationwide vaccination beginning in 1957… No protection is demonstrable in infants.”

1978 Several scientific reports published in esteemed medical journals were linking the smallpox vaccine to a broad spectrum of increasingly common diseases and disorders. Autism, diabetes, neuromyelitis, other neurological diseases, tuberculosis, chromosome damage and sudden infant death were being associated with the smallpox vaccine. References to those reports, as published in the world’s leading primarily foreign medical journals between 1960 and 1978, are available at
http://www.vaclib.org/basic/smallpoxindex.htm*<http://www.vaclib.org/basic/smallpoxindex.htm

1978 Experimental “hepatitis B” vaccine trials were conducted by the CDC, in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, and the ads for research subjects specifically asked for promiscuous homosexual men, while there is also evidence that the first “hepatitis B” vaccines were also tested on Blacks in Central Africa, and mentally retarded children. (Leonard G. Horowitz, “Hepatitis B Vaccine and the Origin of HIV/AIDS: Perspectives on a Possible Vaccine Induced Pandemic” Les Premieres Recontres Medicales, May 29, 2001).

1979 Bulletin No. 6, March 30, Wyeth DPT Vaccine Recall. “Between August 1978 and March 1979, 77 infants in Tennessee died suddenly from unexpected causes – compared with 74 during the same period in 1977-78. These deaths were diagnosed as sudden infant death syndrome, or crib death. Of these 77 infants, eight died within a week of being vaccinated against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough) using the same lot of DTP vaccine.”

1979 Dr. Robert S. Mendelsohn, who was the National Medical Director of “Head Start,” a syndicated columnist who wrote “The People’s Doctor, and the chairman of the Medical Licensure Committee for the State of Illinois, Associate Professor at The University of Illinois, Chicago, and Medical Director of Chicago’s Michael Reese Hospital was quoted as saying: “My suspicion, which is shared by others in my profession, is that the nearly 10,000 SIDS deaths that occur in the United States each year are related to one or more of the vaccines that are routinely given children. The pertussis vaccine is the most likely villain, but it could also be one or more of the others”(See Mendelsohn’s book: “Confessions of a medical heretic,” Contemporary Books, 1997).

1979 A 16-minute segment of 60 minutes with Mike Wallace and Ditchburn, Robert K.; “Whooping Cough after stopping pertussis immunisation;” British Medical Journal; 1979, 1, 1601-1603; 16, June: “Summary and Conclusions: An epidemic of whooping cough occurred in a rural practice in Shetland, containing 144 children under 16. Before July 1974, all children were immunised against pertussis, but after that date immunisation was stopped. Of the 134 children studied, 93 had been immunised. Sixty five of the children developed whooping cough. The incidence of infections was similar in those who had and had not been immunised. The incidence was also similar in those born before and after July 1974.There was not evidence to support the routine use of pertussis immunisation in rural Shetland.”

1978-9 Claim by Robert C. Gallo that 0.06 per cent based on 339 cases of T-cell leukemia among 600,000 Japanese subjects who are antibody-positive for “HTLV-I” living 175 miles from Nagasiki.  Gallo claimed he isolated the first examples of a so-called leukemia virus, HTLV-I in 1978-9 and the results were published in 1980 and early 1981 (from Virus Hunters http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/javirus.htm).

“Gallo is credited with isolating and describing the first human retrovirus. Japanese and American researchers confirmedby analyzing the RNA of both isolates that the Japanese and American viruses were related strains of the same virus. They could never be exactly the same because of the mutations which occur as the virus replicates, but the RNA sequence was close enough in the two isolates.” “Once the virus (REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE AND ANTIBODY POSITIVE SERUM SAMPLES-no virus was identified) had been described, other laboratories looked for it (biochemically not with an electron microscope). “It” was found in black patients born in the US, Caribbean countries or South America; Caribbean-born black people in England, Africans and Japanese. What could tie these disparate regions together mused Gallo.” “The answer he came up with was the slave trade. Miyoshi in Japan found Japanese macaques had antibodies to HTLV-I and he suggested the monkeys had the disease first and infected people. Researchers at Gottingen, Germany, and in Gallo’s lab found that many species of African monkeys had antibodies which reacted with HTLV-I. African green monkey and chimpanzee viruses were most closely related to the virus Gallo had found in leukaemic cells.” “Gallo suggested:‘HTLV-I originated in Africa where it infected many species of Old World primates including human beings. It reached the Americas along with the slave trade.’ Curiously, it may well have arrived in Japan the same way. In the sixteenth century Portuguese traders traveled to Japan and stayed specifically in the islands where HTLV-I is now endemic. Along with them they brought both African slaves and monkeys, as contemporary Japanese works of art show, and either one or the other may have carried the virus.’

“The discovery of HTLV-I infection on Hokkaido, one of the northern islands of Japan, immediately challenged this view of events but Gallo and his colleagues have remained attached to the monkey-virus (BLACK-SLAVE PERSON TRANSMITTED) theory.”

“So, why is it thought that this virus causes the leukemia? ‘First because of the coincidence between virus and leukemia – find one and you will find the other, Gallo says.” “The incidence of adult T-cell leukemia in Japan (175 miles from Nagasiki) is estimated to be only 0.06 per cent based on 339 cases of T-cell leukemia among 600,000 subjects who are antibody-positive for HTLV-I. Why is this?” “Because of the latency period, responds Gallo. It will cause leukemia, but it may take as long as forty years.”

Thus Gallo’s believed, and the scientific world and U.S. Government accepted that Japanese art work evidence proved that black slaves caught a cancer virus (“HTLV-1”) from monkeys on those lonely long ocean voyages during the slave trade, which caused Japanese living near Nagasaki to catch cancer centuries later after atomic bombs were dropped on their civilian populations to “save lives,” and that it may take as long as 40 years for the so-called “retrovirus” to emerge from cells to causes cancer.

Other “top AIDS scientists,” “experts,” and medical journals even have advanced the idea that Africans must have smeared monkey blood on their loins to enhance their sexual experience, or engage in “dry sex,” futher promoting the racist theory of the origin of “HIV,” having been transferred to blacks from non-human primates SOMEHOW, and that these Africans continue to even acquire new AIDS viruses from non-human “contacts” to this day:

“Sir: The isolation from monkeys of retroviruses closely related to HIVstrongly suggests a simian origin for this virus… Several unlikely hypotheses have been put forward… In his book on the sexual life of people of the Great Lakes area of Africa Kashamura wrote: “pour stimulerintense, on leur inocule dans les cuisses, la region du pubis et le dos dusang preleve sur un singe, pour un homme, sur une guenon, pour ne femme” (to stimulate a man or a woman and induce them to intense sexual activity, monkey blood [for a man] or she-monkey blood [for a woman] was directly inoculated in the pubic area and also the thighs and back). These magic practices would therefore constitute an efficient experimental transmission model and could be responsible for the emergence of AIDS in man” (Noireau F. The Lancet, “HIV transmission from monkey to man”).

1980 (December 20) O. Tonz and S. Bajc, “Convulsions or status epilepticus in 11 infants after pertussis vaccination” (Schweiz. Med. Wochenschr., vol. 110, no. 51, , pp. 1965-71): In three of 11 cases, grand mal epilepsy persisted and two children developed infantile epileptic encephalopathy (Lennox Syndrome). “The following conclusions are drawn from these observations: 1) In view of the usually benign course of whooping cough today, current vaccination is hardly satisfactory. Improvement of the available vaccines is an urgent necessity… 2) Parents should be better informed about the risks involved in pertussis vaccination. 3) Booster inoculations should be abandoned. 4) Health authorities should decide whether the current pertussis vaccination program should be abandoned. 5) Complications following vaccination should be registered…..”

1981 All 50 states had enacted legislation demanding measles vaccination as a prerequisite for enrolling in school. During that 13-year period, legislators characterized their sweeping changes regarding vaccination requirements as giving parents “helpful prompts to action.” The belief by public health officials that parents needed a push toward social responsibility provided the justification for increasingly coercive measures to force vaccination. Since the 1980s, regulations for daycare and health care institutions and recommendations for colleges regarding “vaccine-preventable diseases” have been added. In fact, more than 200 vaccination laws, appropriations bills and policies are considered during each state legislative session across the nation. Funding for vaccination programs is a substantial part of every state’s annual budget. As the number of mandates increased, every state retained clauses within their statutes to exempt children from vaccination for medical reasons. Every state, except West Virginia and Mississippi, currently allows parents to refuse vaccinations if they have significant religious objections to the procedure.

1981 June 5th. “Pneumocystis Pneumonia–Los Angeles,” by Dr. Michael Gottlieb and colleagues of University of California at Los Angeles, appeared in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (vol. 30, pp. 250-52), a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) publication. This was the first article about AIDS in the medical literature. By the end of the year, Gottlieb and colleagues had published two reports (the first MMWR and the second in the NEJM) that detailed nine case studies, noting the commonalities among the cases, such as sexual preference and quick development of a rare form of pneumonia. All (100%) of the patients were claimed to be previously healthy individuals who had laboratory-confirmed cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection within five months of PCP diagnosis and candidal mucosal infection, according to the report http://www.infectiousdiseasenews.com/200606/discovery.asp. Because CMV is found in every “AIDS” patient, Gottlieb suggests it is the cause of the syndromes, despite the fact that his patients never came into contact with each other. Gottlieb is never given tenure at UCLA despite years of lecturing and work on discovering the “Gay Plague, and opportunistic infections that come to characterize the beginning of the AIDS era.

1981 Japan licenses “safer” DPT vaccine, the acellular DTaP. 1982 In 1982, Maryland health officials blamed a pertussis epidemic on parents’ fears of the dangers of DPT vaccine; but when former top virologist for the U.S. Division of Biological Standards, Dr. J. Anthony Morris, analyzed the 41 cases, he confirmed only 5, and all had been vaccinated.

1983 to 1985 First Hib (Hemophilus influenza B) vaccine (taken off the market in 1985 for safety and efficacy reasons).

1983 “LAV” (Lymphodenopathy-Associated Virus” (A REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE-POSITIVE SERUM SAMPLE USING GALLO’S APPROACH AND CHARACTERIZATION OF THE CANCER VIRUSES, “HTLV-I AND II”) is “isolated” from a young male homosexual, with a previous history of two treatments for gonorrhea, one treatment the year before for syphilis, and antibodies against Herpes I and II, Epstein-Barr virus, and cytomegalovirus are reported to be present in this young man by Luc Montagnier’s Pasteur group. The paper is rejected, but shepherded through to publication the next year by Robert Gallo, to be awarded eventually with the Nobel Prize in 2008 for the first isolation of “The AIDS virus.”

1984 (February) “Severity of whooping cough in England before and after the decline in pertussis…” (Archives of Disease in Childhood, vol. 59, no. 2, , pp. 162-5): “Since the decline of pertussis immunisation, hospital admission and death rates from whooping cough have fallen unexpectedly… The severity of attacks and the complication rates in children [who were] admitted to hospital were virtually unchanged.”

1984 March 29 A letter by Gallo is written, dated one day before he submitted his papers to Science, in which Gallo states, “It’s extremely rare to find fresh cells [from AIDS patients] expressing the virus… cell culture seems to be necessary to induce virus,” a statement which raises the possibility he was working with a laboratory artifact. [Gallo RC. Letter to Jun Minowada, MD. Personal Correspondence.1984 Mar 29. http://sciencefictions.net/pdfdoc/Letter_from_R_Gallo_to_J_Minowada_03.29.84.pdf

1984 (March) Mathew Gonda, who heads the EM facility at the National Cancer Institute claims there is no “HTLV-I, HTLV-II, or HTLV-III in the Gallo lab’s HTLV-IIIB isolate electron microscopy samples, and that only cellular garbage can be seen in the Papovic/Gallo samples. Because Gonda is the Head of the Electron Microscopy Lab at the NCI, the document is significant, because it was apparently sent to Gallo days before the Heckler-Gallo Press release several weeks before the Papovic/Gallo et al., publications would appear in Science, claiming that “HTLV-IIIB” was the cause of AIDS (later renamed “HIV” by a secret committee organized by former Nobelist and NIH head, Harold Varmus). Here it is shown in full, as provided by the investigative medical journalist, Janine Roberts:

March 26, 1984 (Received March 27):

Dr. Mica Papovic Laboratory of Tumor Biology NIH Building 37,

Dear Mica

I am sending you 4 extra copies of results requested by Betsy Read. She said Dr. Gallo wanted these micrographs for publication because they contained HTLV particles. If this assumption is based on the cultures being antigen positive, I would like to point out that the “particles” in micro- graph 0905 are in debris of a degenerated cell. No other extracellular “virus-like particles” were observed free between cells anywhere in the pellet. The small extracellular vesicles in 0904 are at least 50% smaller than HTLV mature particles seen in type I, II, or III. Again, these vesicles can be found in any cell pellet. I do not believe any of the particles photographed are HTLV I, II, or III.

cc Robert Gallo

Betsy Reed

Best regards,

Mathew Gonda, PhD.

Head, Electron Microscopy Lab

1984 (April) Announced in a media press release by Dr. Robert Gallo and Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler, “HIV” is named as “the probable cause of AIDS” and is thought to be “a variant of a known human cancer virus.” Dr. Gallo rushes that same day to patent the first “HIV” test kit, and was subsequently brought up on charges of scientific misconduct by the Dingell Commission and the Office of Scientific Integrity of the NIH (John Crewdson: Gallo Case, Truth Termed A Casualty Report: Science Subverted in AIDS Dispute; Chicago Tribune (CT) – SUNDAY, January 1, 1992), for accusations that Gallo attempted to steal from Dr. Luc Montagnier’s group at the Pasteur their so-called “LAV-BRU-virus,” which the Pasteur group had “isolated” the year before from a young male homosexual, with a previous history of treatmet for gonorrhea, syphilis, Herpes I and II, and EBV. At the Gallo/Heckler “HIV causes AIDS” press release, an “HIV” vaccine is promised in 2 years by Secretary Heckler. Like “The Great Spanish Flu of 1918 (following the vaccination of the military), the so-called “HIV” virus is said to attack mostly people in the prime of their young lives.

1984 (April) Evidence is presented in 4 Science articles by Gallo’s group that “HIV” causes AIDS. As reviewed by Michael Gieger, Executive Director of HEAL San Diego: “Robert Gallo’s claim that HIV is the cause of AIDS was first put forward on the basis of four papers he published in Science, May 4 1984 issue. ( Popovic M, Sarngadharan MG, Read E, et al. Detection, Isolation,and Continuous Production of Cytopathic Retroviruses (HTLV-III) from Patients with AIDS and Pre-AIDS. Science 1984;224:497-500.; Gallo RC, Salahuddin SZ, Popovic M, et al. Frequent Detection and Isolation of Cytopathic Retroviruses (HTLV-III) from Patients with AIDS and at Risk for AIDS. Science 1984;224:500-502; Schupbach J, Popovic M, Gilden RV, et al. Serological analysis of a Subgroup of Human T-Lymphotrophic Retroviruses (HTLV-III) Associated with AIDS. Science 1984;224:503-505; Sarngadharan MG, Popovic M,Bruch L, et al. Antibodies Reactive to Human T-Lymphotrophic Retroviruses (HTLV-III) in the Serum of Patients with AIDS. Science 1984:224:506-508).”

“The New York Times (Lawrence K. Altman) reported the news of the claim but his article contained six or seven caveats to the effect that the claim might not bear out. Gallo’s team were unable to demonstrate the presence of the virus in two thirds – 64 per cent – of the AIDS patients sampled. As noted in the article: As summarized in Table 1, we found HTLV-III in 18 of 21 samples from patients with pre-AIDS, from three of four clinically normal mothers of juvenile AIDS patients, 13 of 43 adult AIDS patients with Kaposi’s sarcoma, and 10 of 21 adult AIDS patients with opportunistic infections.” As analyzed by Michael Geiger, Board of Directors, Health Education Men’s Liason, San Deigo (HEAL): This result partly veiled the stark failure of the sampling to identify persuasively HIV as a cause of AIDS. For the sum total of AIDS patients with symptoms of AIDS – the groups in bold in the table above – was that in ONLY 26 (3 +13 +10) out of 72 (8 + 43 + 21) cases was the Gallo lab able to show HTLV-III virus detected and isolated. 26 of 72, or 36%, was insufficient to demonstrate that HIV was the plausible cause of the AIDS symptoms or their underlying immune deficiency. If anything, the testing demonstrated that HTL-III was certainly not a plausible cause of AIDS.”

The heavily edited Gallo group papers claimed, however:

“These studies of HTLV-III isolates from patients with AIDS and pre-AIDS and from healthy individuals at risk for AIDS provide strong evidence of a causative involvement of the virus in AIDS.”

“Thus contrary to subsequent headlines the paper did not state firmly that HTLV-III (later renamed Human Immunodeficiency Virus) was the cause or even a “probable” cause of AIDS, only that there was evidence of a “causative involvement of the virus in AIDS.”

“In another paper of the four (Sarngadharan MG, Popovic M,Bruch L, et al. Antibodies Reactive to Human T-Lymphotrophic Retroviruses (HTLV-III) in the Serum of Patients with AIDS. Science 1984:224:506-508), however, the claim was bolder:”

“The data presented here and in the accompanying reports suggest that HTLV-III is the primary cause of AIDS.”

“The low figure of only 36% of AIDS patients with symptoms that had HTLV-III virus present was excused in an accompanying news report in a Science Research News column by Jean Marx as possibly due to deterioration of the samples.”

“When the investigators calculated the percentage, they used the total of all the AIDS samples sent to them, even though some had deteriorated to the point where they were of questionable value for analysis.”

The paper itself had noted: “The incidence of virus isolated reported here probably underestimates its true incidence since many tissue specimens were not received or handled under what we now recognize as ideal conditions. This is particularly so for the samples received from late stage AIDS patients. That is to say, 26 of the 72 with AIDS tested positive for the virus, 22 of the 47 who did not have AIDS (asymptomatic or pre-AIDS ( i.e. mild and non AIDS specific symptoms), suggesting that HTLV-III positivity was a poor guide as to who would develop AIDS symptoms. Later, this problem was solved by counting as AIDS only those who were HTLV-III positive.”

The initial description and press release by Margaret Heckler of “HIV” as a known variant of a cancer virus in retrospect was perhaps unfortunate, because as stated by Gallo and Montagnier in a 2003 New England Journal of Medicine article (Gallo RC., Montagnier LM. The discovery of HIV as the cause of AIDS. NEJM Vol. 349:2283-2285, December 2003), the molecular (biochemical) profile that was associated with “HIV,” was derived from the same techniques used to characterize the molecular signatures of Gallo’s previous putative and doubtful “cancer viruses,” “HTLV-I” and “HTLV-II” he envisioned jumping from monkeys to black slaves during the slave trade as was revealed to him in art works, and by using his strange, indirect, non-specific reverse transcriptase, or antibody detection methods, and of course, the detection of reverse transcriptase, later became known to be ubiquitous in nature and not specific to any viruses. But at the press conference, the team formed by Gallo and the U.S. Government then claimed that “HTLV-III (“HIV”) was distinctly different from Gallo’s own leukemia-associated retroviral signatures of “HTLV-I” and “HTLV-II” in that it attacked and killed lymphocytes, rather than induced them to proliferate as would leukemic cells (if “HTLV-I or HTLV-II” actually caused leukemia, for which today as of 2012, there still is no evidence to support this claim).

The patent and intellectual property issues of the U.S. and French governments surrounding the creation of an “AIDS” blood test to protect the blood supply also proved to be an unfortunate series of confusing and hateful events that made possible accusations against the American-French collaboration that virtually insured suspicion of the “HIV=AIDS” hypothesis, and served, it could be argued, to derail progress toward defining AIDS and immune suppression. But because Robert Gallo became a shepherd and scientific peer review was avoided with respect to the 1983 Barre-Sinoussi/Montagnier et al. paper, and although it was claimed that there was an initial molecular concordance between the Montagnier’s “LAV-BRU” isolate, and Gallo’s “HTLV-IIIB isolate (later called “HIV”), nobody could “amplify Montagnier’s “LAV-BRU isolate” (later called “HIV) or “grow” it on either sides of the Atlantic, and the Gallo group pooled their “isolate” from the sera of twenty persons said to have AIDS (naming it the “HTLV-IIIB isolate”), and they amplified the molecular signature thought to be associated with AIDS in cancer cells instead of normal lymphocytes, to avoid Montagnier’s problem of not being able to “grow” (detect) the LAV-BRU” isolate in the cord sera of normal lymphocytes treated with “AIDS-patient” sera. The “HTLV-IIIB” molecules discovered in this Gallo group “isolate” from what were then defined as 20 different ARC or AIDS patients, and despite “a laboratory accident” whereby it was claimed that a different contaminated isolate was sent from The Pasteur Institute to Bethesda which “infected” the cultures of the Gallo group, Robin Weiss’s group in England, and at least several other laboratories, research in these labs was thus confounded for at least the next year (Robert Gallo, personal communication). And despite the fact that Gallo shepherded through the 1983 Barre-Sinnousi et al. paper the year before through to publication because it didn’t pass initial review, the patent on the blood test was filed by Dr. Gallo the day of the press release. This patent filing was from henceforward destined to be plagued by numerous accusations of stealing, deception, misconduct, and fraud. However, shepherding of papers occurs frequently among cooperating scientific groups, and as such, such papers are not rigorously “peer-reviewed.” The interests of the U.S. and French governments, and especially the Pasteur Institute regarding the patenting of an AIDS blood test, fear of contagion, religious views regarding morality, sex, and drugs, and politics began an era that perhaps should be characterized as the most politicized disease in history. And even though it was finally concluded that there was no misconduct or steeling of the “HTLV-IIIB” or LAV-BRU reverse-transcriptase positive “viral isolates” found in the Gallo/Papovic case, the numerous accusations, and the lengthy and costly investigations of misconduct and blame only served to polarize those involved and those critical of them, and the charges of wrong doing only fueled bitter rivalry and criticism that has lasted for more than two decades. Yet the ill-defined, and according to Gonda, non-existent viral particles, and the molecular markers in these samples that became known as “HIV” in isolates that Montagnier’s and Gallo’s group claimed to have tied to a clinical syndrome in “pre-AIDS” and AIDS patients and in one putative ARC patient as the Pasteur had intensively studied (Patient One), constituted a strong motive for many to pursue in depth, the nature and meaning of that molecular signatures of “HIV” in persons said to have immune suppression. Then, in November, of 1984, the Pasteur Institute investigators published “the genetic sequence” of “LAV,” and because no two “HIV” samples have ever been the same, many scientists and doctors were critical of the strength of Montagnier’s and Gallo’s correlation between “HIV’s” molecular markers and the disease syndromes to which these signatures were associated because of documents that became available during the numerous investigations. And when the papers were published for all to see, it turned out to be insufficient to demonstrate the claim. Gallo had found the virus in too few of the AIDS patients with actual AIDS symptoms .

1984 The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported a measles outbreak in a documented 100 percent vaccinated population. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMRW) 33 (24),6/22/84.

1985 Flossie Wong-Stall and Robert Gallo publish: “The association of Kaposi’s sarcoma with AIDS deserves special mention. This otherwise extremely rare malignancy occurs predominantly in a restricted group, that is, the homosexuals, and can occur in the absence of any T-cell defect in the patients.” (Flosie Wong-Staal & Robert C. Gallo. Nature Vol 317, 3 Oct 1985).

Note: In other words, Kaposi’s sarcoma, as one of the first two types of AIDS-indicator illnesses occurred among homosexuals only, without any detectable defect in T-cell counts or physiology due to “HIV.”

1985 Professor G. Stewart claims that “There is no doubt in my mind that in the U.K. alone some hundreds, if not thousands, of well infants have suffered irreparable brain damage needlessly (due to being vaccinated).” Prof. G. Stewart, Dev. Biol. Stand. Vol. 61: pp 395-405. 1985.

1985 Vaccines required for school included polio, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP), and measles-mumps-rubella (MMR).

1985 (Development of Biological Standards, vol. 61, 1985, pp. 395-405):”Whooping cough and pertussis vaccine: a comparison of risks and benefits in Britain during the period 1968-83″ “Since 1975, acceptance of pertussis vaccine has fallen from over 70% to 50% or less in most parts of Britain. This permits evaluation of a continuing natural experiment in which the frequency and severity of whooping cough can be compared [with] those of adverse events following injections of pertussis vaccine… There is a significant correlation between vaccine-acceptance and hospital admission by district of residence… It is concluded that, in children living in non-deprived circumstances in Britain, the risk of pertussis vaccine during the period 1970-83 exceeded those of whooping cough. In some deprived sectors, the risks from whooping cough might have been marginally higher but there was no evidence that this was associated with any increase in deaths or permanent disabilities.”

1986 Vaccine Injury Compensation Act passed.

1986 Recombinant Hepatitis B vaccine licensed.

1986 In 1986, 90% of 1,300 pertussis cases in Kansas were “adequately vaccinated.” In Chicago, 72% of pertussis cases were up-to-date with their vaccinations. Neil Miller, Vaccines: Are They Safe and Effective? p. 33.

1987 Hib vaccine licensed.

1987 Nobelist, Howard Temin who discovered reverse transcriptase (RT), and Nobelist and former NIH head Harold Varmus, claimed that reverse transcriptase “is a normal protein found in the uninfected cells of yeasts, insects and mammals, after the scientific community had accepted that reverse transcriptase was specific for retroviruses (Varmus H. Reverse transcription Sci. Am. 257:48-54, 1987).

1987 National Academy of Sciences member Peter Duesberg publishes a monumental review article in the journal Cancer Research demonstrating that “HIV” is a harmless passenger virus that can not possibly cause the symptoms attributed to AIDS (Peter H. Duesberg, “Retroviruses as Carcinogens and Pathogens: Expectations and Reality. Cancer Research 47, 1199-1220, March 1, 1987).

1987 (May) London Times Edition Smallpox vaccine ‘triggered Aids virus.’ BY PEARCE WRIGHT, SCIENCE EDITOR

“The Aids epidemic may have been triggered by the mass vaccination campaign which eradicated smallpox. The World Health Organization, which masterminded the 13-year campaign, is studying new scientific evidence suggesting that immunization with the smallpox vaccine Vaccinia awakened the unsuspected, dormant human immuno deficiency virus infection (HIV).Some experts fear that in obliterating one disease, another disease was transformed from a minor endemic illness of the Third World into the current pandemic. While doctors now accept that Vaccinia can activate other viruses, they are divided about whether it was the main catalyst to the Aids epidemic. But an adviser to WHO who disclosed the problem, told The Times: ‘I thought it was just a coincidence until we studied the latest findings about the reactions which can be caused by Vaccinia. Now I believe the smallpox vaccine theory is the explanation to the explosion of Aids.‘ ‘In obliterating one disease, another was transformed.’Further evidence comes from the Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington. While smallpox vaccine is no longer kept for public health purposes, new recruits to the American armed services are immunized as a precaution against possible biological warfare. Routine vaccination of a 19-year-old recruit was the trigger for stimulation of dormant HIV virus into Aids.This discovery of how people with subclinical HIV infection are at risk of rapid development of Aids as a vaccine-induced disease was made by a medical team working with Dr Robert Redfield at Walter Reed. The recruit who developed Aids after vaccination had been healthy throughout high school. He was given multiple immunizations, followed by his first smallpox vaccination.Two and a half weeks later he developed fever, headaches, neck stiffness and night sweats. Three weeks later he was admitted to Walter Reed suffering from meningitis and rapidly developed further symptoms of Aids and died after responding for a short time to treatment. There was no evidence that the recruit had been involved in any homosexual activity.In describing their discovery in a paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine a fortnight ago, the Walter Reed team gave a warning against a plan to use modified versions of the smallpox vaccine to combat other diseases in developing countries. Other doctors who accept the connection between the anti-smallpox campaign and the Aids epidemic now see answers to questions which had baffled them. How, for instance, the Aids organism (?), previously regarded by scientists as ‘weak, slow and vulnerable,’ began to behave like a type capable of creating a plague.Many experts are reluctant to support the theory publicly because they believe it would be interpreted unfairly as criticism of WHO. In addition, they are concerned about the impact on other public health campaigns with vaccines, such as against diptheria and the continued use of Vaccinia in potential Aids research. The coincidence between the anti-smallpox campaign and the rise of Aids was discussed privately last year by experts at WHO. The possibility was dismissed on grounds of unsatisfactory evidence. Advisors to the organization believed then that too much attention was being focussed on Aids by the media. It is now felt that doubts would have risen sooner if public health authorities in Africa had more willingly reported infection statistics to WHO. Instead, some African countries continued to ignore the existence of Aids even after US doctors alerted the world when the infection spread to the United States.However, as epidemiologists gleaned more information about Aids from reluctant Central African countries, clues began to emerge from the new findings when examined against the wealth of detail known about smallpox as recorded in the Final Report of the Global Commission for the Certification of Smallpox Eradication.The smallpox vaccine theory would account for the position of each of the seven Central African states which top the league table of most-affected countries; why Brazil became the most afflicted Latin American country; and how Haiti became the route for the spread of Aids to the US. It also provides an explanation of how the infection was spread more evenly between males and females in Africa than in the West and why there is less sign of infection among five to 11-year-olds in Central Africa. Although no detailed figures are available, WHO information indicated that the Aids league table of Central Africa matches the concentration of vaccinations.The greatest spread of HIV infection coincides with the most intense immunization programmes, with the number of people immunised being as follows: Zaire 36,878,000; Zambia 19,060,000; Tanzania 14,972,000; Uganda 11,616,000; Malawai 8,118,000; Ruanda 3,382,000 and Burundi 3,274,000. Brazil, the only South American country covered in the eradication campaign, has the highest incidence of Aids in that region. About 14,000 Haitians, on United Nations secondment to Central Africa, were covered in the campaign. They began to return home at a time when Haiti had become a popular playground for San Francisco homosexuals. Dr Robert Gallo, who first identified the Aids virus in the US, told The Times: ‘The link between the WHO programme and the epidemic in Africa is an interesting and important hypothesis.’ I cannot say that it actually happened, but I have been saying for some years that the use of live vaccines such as that used for smallpox can activate a dormant infection such as HIV. ‘No blame can be attached to WHO, but if the hypothesis is correct it is a tragic situation and a warning that we cannot ignore.‘ Aids was first officially reported from San Francisco in 1981 and it was about two years later before Central African states were implicated. It is now known that these states had become a reservoir of Aids as long ago as the later 1970s. Although detailed figures of Aids cases in Africa are difficult to collect, the more than two million carriers, and 50,000 deaths, estimated by the World Health Organization are concentrated in the Countries where the smallpox immunization programme was most intensive. The 13-year eradication campaign ended in 1980, with the saving of two million lives a year and 15 million infections. The global saving from eradication has been put at dollars 1,000 million a year.Charity and health workers are convinced that millions of new Aids cases are about to hit southern Africa. After a meeting of 50 experts near Geneva this month it was revealed that up to 75 million, one third of the population, could have the disease within the next five years. Some organizations which have closely studied Africa, such as War on Want, believe that South Africa’s black population, so far largely protected from the disease, could be most affected as migrant workers bring it into the country from the worst hit areas further north. The apartheid policy, they predict, will intensify its outbreak by confining the groups into comparatively small, highly populated towns where it will be almost impossible to contain its spread.”

1988 In Clinical Investigative Medicine, (Vol. 11, no. 4, August 1988, pp. 304-9), it says that: “17 had been vaccinated for measles. All 17 experienced measles again, showing IgM antibodies indicating acute infection. “A history of prior vaccination is not always associated with immunity nor with the presence of specific antibodies.”

1988 A serological survey was performed on 573 subjects aged 3-80 years or older to evaluate presence of neutralizing antibodies for types 1,2,3 Sabin vaccines strains as well as a wild strain of poliovirus type 1 isolated in France (Virologie. 1988 Oct-Dec;39(4):241-5) reported that: “The results obtained indicate a satisfactory polio immunity level in all the 4 groups: seropositives, 96.7%-98.9% for type 2, 91.8%-98.2% for type 1 (Sabin vaccine strain), 89.3%-96.6% for type 3 and 84.2%-96.4% for type 1 wild strain. The highest immunity levels were found in group D (children with recorded history of complete polio vaccination) and in group A (unvaccinated people but contemporary with the past polio epidemics). A special comment is made with respect to 14 subjects showing satisfactory antibody titres for all the three types of Sabin-vaccine strains but who have proved to be seronegative (less than 4) for the wild type 1 poliovirus strain.”

Translation: The best “neutralizing” antibody levels were found in groups A and D: the completely vaccinated (having had all their shots), and group D, the non-vaccinated who never received vaccine, but who were said to have lived during past polio epidemics-and who are thought to have acquired polio naturally, and overcome it naturally. Moral of the story: either get completely vaccinated, or don’t bother, and you will end up in either group A or D with the highest neutralizing antibody levels.

1988 Cherry, et al., Pediatrics Supplement, p. 973, 1988. When Japan moved the vaccination age to 2 years old in 1975, crib death and infantile convulsions virtually disappeared.

1988 Hib added to vaccine immunization schedule. 1988 Cherry, James D., MD, Brunell, Philip A. MD, Golden, Gerald A., MD, and Karzon, David T., MD. “Report of the Task Force on Pertussis and Pertussis Immunization – 1988”, Pediatrics, June 1988, Volume 81, Number 6, Part 2, Supplement, p. 955 “Reported cases and outbreaks in older children and young adults may reflect a less durable vaccine-induced protection than seen in natural disease.  The duration of protection has varied in several studies, depending on the epidemiological setting, ie, prevalence of natural disease as well as the vaccine product used.  A study in Michigan showed an efficacy of 80% 3 years after the last dose, 50% between 4 and 7 years, and virtually none after 12 years.  Breakthrough disease noted in this study was usually mild.” 1988 Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Funded. 1988 JAMA publishes a report claiming that a case-control study has shown that 41 percent of meningitis occurred in children vaccinated against the disease. The vaccine’s protective efficacy was minus 58 percent. This means that children are much more likely to get the disease if they are vaccinated. (JAMA, 1988, Osterholm et al., 260: 1423-1428.)

1988 Several other important events occurred in 1988. In January, The CDC updated the International Classification of Diseases codes for HIV infection for use with U.S. morbidity and mortality data, and in June, the brochure “Understanding AIDS,” prepared by Surgeon General C. Everett Koop in collaboration with the CDC, was mailed to every household in the United States. In August, NIAID’s AIDS Vaccine Evaluation Units initiated their first study of an experimental AIDS vaccine. In September, NIDR investigators reported that saliva inhibits transmission of HIV, and in October, AIDS protestors, demanding a quicker approval process for drug treatments, shut down the FDA. In October, NIAID established three programs: the Centers for AIDS Research (CFARS) to improve the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of AIDS; the Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Units (Pediatric ACTUs), a network of clinical sites to test experimental drugs on children; and the Programs for Excellence in Basic Research (PEBRA), to develop novel strategies to determine how HIV causes disease [From “In their own words).

1989-1990 Shyh-Ching Lo finds Mycoplama incognitos in 22/34 AIDS patients and in 0 non-AIDS patients. Mycoplasma are found by EM to be enriched in affected tissues. The finding is ignored by Anthony Fauci-Czar of the AIDS funding racket.

1989- 2003 Explosion of autism in U.S. The incidence of autism (and other related disorders) went from about 1 in 2,500 children to 1 in every 166. Up until about 1989 pre-school children got only 3 vaccines (polio, DPT, MMR). By 1999 the CDC recommended a total of 22 vaccines to be given before children reach the 1st grade, including Hepatitis B, which is given to newborns within the first 24 hours of birth. Many of these vaccines contained mercury. MMR is particularly worrisome but health officials censor all concerns or criticisms even by well-known doctors and scientists, and congressional hearings. In the 1990s approximately 40 million children were injected with mercury-containing vaccines. The cumulative amount of the potent neurotoxin mercury being given to children in this number of vaccines in many cases would be an amount 187 times the EPA daily exposure limit.

1989 In 1989, the country of Oman experienced a widespread polio outbreak six months after achieving a complete vaccination rate.

1990 Conjugate Hib vaccine licensed. 1990-1993 The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) operated by Dissatisfied Parents Together (DPT) says that a new Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on the association between DPT vaccine and permanent brain damage “confirms that the vaccine can cause children to suffer acute brain inflammation which sometimes leads to death or permanent neurological damage. The parent consumer activist group also charges that they have obtained evidence through the Freedom of Information Act that the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is failing to properly monitor reports of death and injuries following vaccination and that doctors around the country are failing to report deaths and injuries which occur after vaccination to DHHS.” “In a year-long investigation of the Vaccine Adverse Reaction Reporting System (VAERS) operated by the Food and Drug Administration, NVIC/DPT analyzed VAERS computer discs used by the FDA to store data on reports of deaths and injuries following DPT vaccination. A total of 54,072 reports of adverse events following vaccination were listed in a 39-month period from July 1990 to November 1993, with 12,504 reports being associated with DPT vaccine, including 471 deaths.” “A wide variation in the numbers of reports associated with different lots of DPT vaccine were discovered, with some lots listing many more deaths and injuries than others. In one DPT vaccine lot, there were 129 adverse events and 9 deaths reported between September 1992 and September 1993. Most adverse events occurred within a few days of vaccination and many reports also contained descriptions of classic pertussis vaccine reaction symptoms. This particular lot met the FDA’s criteria for triggering an “investigation” (ie., report of one death or two serious injuries within a seven day period) 11 times within a 12-month period.” “There are some lots of vaccine which are associated with many more deaths and injuries than other lots. These lots are often referred to as ‘hot lots.’ Even though the FDA’s criteria for an investigation was triggered 11 times within a 12-month period on just one of the many lots we looked at, we know for a fact the lot was never recalled. The FDA has not recalled a suspicious lot of DPT vaccine because of high numbers of deaths and injuries associated with it for at least 15 years,” said Kathi Williams, NVIC/DPT co-founder and Acting Director. “That is because the position of those who operate VAERS is that the DPT vaccine does not cause death or injury. So the death and injury reports are ignored. It is a shocking example of how little we know about the true extent of vaccine-associated injuries and deaths.”

1990 The FDA grants Department of Defense waiver of Nuremberg Code for use of unapproved drugs and vaccines in Desert Shield.

1991 Recombinant Hepatitis B recommended for all newborn infants and children. 1991 210 REPORTED cases of hepatitis B vaccine injury from 1991 – 1998 in Illinois, and 5 deaths.

1991 (June) Nature publishes claim about fish farming and influenza pandemics 351, 527 (13 Jun 1991) doi:10.1038/351527a0.

1992 (February 28) “The epidemiology of pertussis in the Republic of Ireland” (Communicable Disease Report[:] CDR Review, vol. 2, no. 3, , pp. R31-3): Following adverse publicity in 1973, uptake of the vaccine fell to 30% in 1976. In recent years, it has leveled out at only 40-45%. Yet when large epidemics of pertussis occurred in 1985 and 1989, mortality from pertussis fell to almost negligible levels.

1992 Alfred Hassig, former 35-year Director of the Swiss Red Cross Transfusion Service, and President of the Board of Trustees of the International Society of Blood Transfusion states: “The sentence of death accompanying the medical diagnosis of AIDS should be abolished. In the virological research, so much money is invested, and the research people want to stay in that area because if you deviate to research in other directions probably other people come in and must be funded. Virologists have nothing new to offer. They keep coming up with excuses, they find constant growth and change in the virus structure, it evades, attacks, strange things, but none of them has the courage to explain properly how these things could possibly be so. AZT (anti-viral AIDS medicine) has, in countless cases, brought about the inevitable and slow asphyxiation of the patient’s body cells. The doctors wrongly diagnose the fatal consequences of AZT medication as AIDS following a prior HIV infection. Treatment with AZT and allied toxic substances may be equivalent to joining a suicide squad with a time fuse. It is the duty of every doctor to preserve life at any cost — and not death-curse people based on any test so they are so frightened they kill themselves. I am sad to say that these voodoo methods were practiced despite there never being any proof that the detected antibodies are an indication of mortality in all diagnosed people. I consider it medical malpractice to push patients into dying by prophesying an early death. We are medical scientists, not prophets!” (Meditel 1992;Continuum Jan/Feb 1996). 1992 Institute of Medicine releases report presenting evidence indicating that there is: “a causal relation between DTP vaccine and anaphylaxis and between the pertussis component of DTP vaccine and extended periods of inconsolable crying or screaming. The committee also reported that the evidence indicates a causal relation between the rubella vaccine and acute arthritis in adult women. The committee found the available evidence weaker but still consistent with a causal relation between DTP vaccine and two conditions–acute encephalopathy and hypotonic, hyporesponsive episodes–and between rubella vaccine and chronic arthritis in adult women. Estimated incidence rates of these adverse events following vaccination are provided, where possible. The committee found that the evidence does not indicate a causal relation between the DTP vaccine and infantile spasms, hypsarrhythmia, Reye’s syndrome, and sudden infant death syndrome. The committee found insufficient evidence to indicate either the presence or absence of a causal relation between DTP vaccine and chronic neurologic damage, aseptic meningitis, erythema multiforme or other rash, Guillain-Barre syndrome, hemolytic anemia, juvenile diabetes, learning disabilities and attention-deficit disorder, peripheral mononeuropathy, or thrombocytopenia, and between rubella vaccine and radiculoneuritis and other neuropathies or thrombocytopenic purpura.”(C.P. Howson and H.V. Fineberg, Adverse events following pertussis and rubella vaccines. Summary of a report of the Institute of Medicine. JAMA Vol. 267 No. 3, January 15, 1992).

1992 “The hepatitis B vaccine causes positive HIV test results.” (Lee, D, Eby W, Molinaro, G.. HIV false positivity after Hepatitis B vaccination. Lancet 339: 1060, 1992).

1992-2006 In 1992 The Lancet publishes the first article describing idiopathic CD4+ T-lymphocytopenia (ICL-AIDS), and 199 more articles appear describing this disease with designation and title in the following years. CD4+ T-lymphocytopenia is one of the 40 or more AIDS-indicator diseases in a patient without “HIV” proteins or nucleic acids detectable despite repeated efforts. Essentially, ICL is AIDS without “HIV.”

1992 Minnesota researchers report that “HIV-sequences” exist in normal in human, chimpanzee, and rhesus monkey DNAs” (Horwitz MS, Boyce-Jacino MT, Faras AJ. Novel human endogenous sequences related to human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Virol. Apr; 66 (4):2170-9, 1992).

1992 America’s Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta admits in that the polio live-virus vaccine had become the main cause of polio in the United States. Specifically, the CDC asserted that, from 1973 to 1983, 87% of all (non-imported) cases of polio resulted directly from vaccine administration. Even more amazingly, it was asserted that every non-imported case of polio in the United States from 1980 to 1989 was vaccine-induced (Strebel, P. M., et al., Epidemiology of Poliomyelitis in the U.S. One Decade after the Last Reported Case of Indigenous Wild Virus Associated Disease, Clinical Infectious Diseases, CDC, February 1992, pp. 568-579).

1992 JM Fine, LC Chen “Confounding in studies of adverse reactions to vaccines,” American Journal of Epidemiology, 136 (1992), pp. 121-35.Studies show that children die at a rate eight times greater than normal within three days of getting a DPT shot.

1993 DPTH (DPT-Hib combo) licensed.

1993 It is reported that half of infants that test “HIV” positive at birth serorevert (reverse) their “HIV-positive status within 18 months (Parekh BS, Shaffer N, Coughlin R, et al. Dynamics of maternal IgG antibody decay and HIV-specific antibody synthesis in infants born to seropositive mothers. The NYC Perinatal HIV Transmission Study Group. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 9:907-12, 1993).

1993 MMWR November 05, 1993 / 42(43);840-841,847 Diphtheria Outbreak — Russian Federation, 1990-1993 Despite high levels of vaccination coverage against diphtheria, an ongoing outbreak of diphtheria has affected parts of the Russian Federation since 1990 (1); as of August 31, 1993, 12,865 cases had been reported. This report summarizes epidemiologic information about this outbreak for January 1990- August 1993, and is based on reports from public health officials in the Russian Federation. Within the report is also says: “an estimated 90% of children were fully vaccinated with four or more doses of diphtheria toxoid by the time they entered school.”URL: http://www.cdc.gov/epo/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00022128.htm

1994The Lancet publishes claims that “The incidence of asthma has been found to be five times more common in vaccinated children.” –The Lancet, 1994.

1994 p24, another protein once thought to be unique to “HIV” is known to be expressed in the thymus glands of “HIV-negative children (Dura WT, Wozniewicz BM. Expression of antigens homologous to human retrovirus molecules in normal and severely atrophic thymus. Thymus 22 (4):245-54, 1994). 1994 D. C. Christie, et al., “The

1993 Epidemic of Pertussis in Cincinnati: Resurgence of Disease in a Highly Immunized Population of Children,” New England Journal of Medicine (July 7, 1994), pp. 16-20.

1994 Failure to reach the goal of measles elimination. Apparent paradox of measles infections in immunized persons. Mayo Vaccine Research Group, Archives of Int. Medicine 154(16):1815-20, 1994 Aug. 22. “The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons.”

1995 Varicella licensed.

1995 It was confirmed again that about half of infants that test “HIV” positive at birth serorevert (reverse) their “HIV-positive status by 18 months Chantry CJ, Cooper ER, Pelton SI, Zorilla C, Hillyer GV, Diaz C. Seroreversion in human immunodeficiency virus-exposed but uninfected infants. Pediatr Infect Dis J 14:382-7, 1995).

1995 Congress of the United States: Office of Technology assessment of the failure of the first 33 “HIV-vaccine” trials. Adverse Reactions to HIV Vaccines: Medical, Ethical, and Legal Issues. (Roger C. Herdman, Director). Below are excerpts from this important milestone document, and some comments regarding the status of “HIV” vaccines since Margaret Heckler in 1984 announced that one would be available in 2 years:

From page 1, 2: “A number of vaccines are being developed that use new strategies and each of these strategies carry special risks:”

1.Vaccines using live vectors, such as the vaccinia virus shown to be attenuated in laboratory animals, may prove to be inadequately attenuated, producing the disease caused by the unattenuated vector.

2.Naked DNA vaccines have been shown to create potent immune responses, but there are theortical reasons to be concerned that they might produce tumors or autoimmune diseases, or be transmitted from mother to fetus.

3.Although inactivated whole virus vaccines have generally been successful in protecting from infection with other viral diseases, it would be difficult to assure that all HIV particles in such a vaccine were inactivated.

4. Live attenuated virus vaccines have also been successful in protecting from other viral diseases, but there is the potential for the viruses to be inadequately attenuated, for an adequately attenuated viral vaccine to cause disease in immunocompromised individuals (Read AIDS patients), and for an adequately attenuated virus to revert to virulence. There is also concern that a live attenuated vaccine could induce tumors. “A number of social harms-non-medical adverse consequences-may result from vaccination:”

5.Vaccines may cause a false-positive HIV screening testing test…resulting in discrimination against vaccine recipients in, for example, military service, health insurance, life insurance, employment, and travel.

6. Participation in an HIV vaccine trial, itself, may result in stigmatization, as others may assume that all vaccine trial participants are members of groups, such as injection drug users and men who have sex with men, who are at increased risk for HIV infection.

7.Vaccinees, relying on the protection afforded by an experimental vaccine, may engage in behaviors that increase their risk for HIV infection.

8. In June, 1994, the AIDS Research Advisory Committee (ARAC) of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Dieases (NIAID) recommended that Phase III clinical trials with enveloped vaccines should not proceed in the United States. Factors contributing to the decision included scientific, political, and ethical issues, and the significant level of scientific uncertainty about the wisdom of immediate trials. Phase I and II clinical trials of HIV will continue.”

From page 2,3. There are 15 ethical issues in HIV vaccine development.

The last one states: # 15. “Although vaccine sponsors have no legal obligation to provide compensation to subjects for injuries incurred as a result of their participation, there is an ethical obligation to do so.”

From page 3. Liability and Compensation for Adverse Reactions:

Any system that limits compensation to injuries from one specific cause, like an HIV vaccine, raises questions of fairness to people with similar injuries from a different vaccine.

A compensation system limited to persons with adverse reactions to an HIV vaccine invites the question why people living with injuries from other vaccines or from other causes should not be compensated as well.”

More companies are engaged in HIV vaccine research than in research for any other type of vaccine. Potential liability may have discouraged some companies, but it has not stopped HIV vaccine development.”

From page 4. “Given the need for an HIV vaccine, it appears unlikely that a manufacturer would be held responsible for distributing a vaccine with a risk of development of cancer that could not be verified at the time it was released.” “The decision whether or not to invest in the development of a vaccine depends on complex financial considerations of a number of factors, including the scientific obstacles to vaccine development, the potential market for the vaccine, the price at which the vaccine could be sold, and the potential liability for vaccines. The major factor influencing vaccine development is the expected return on investment or profitability, and the major obstacles to developing an HIV vaccine are scientific.”

Vaccine manufacturers are not likely to be responsible for harms resulting from the bigotry of others. Physicians who administer HIV vaccines may be the more likely targets for any claim that a vaccine recipient was not adequately warned about possible discrimination.”

From page 9: Adverse reactions to HIV vaccines. Ten vaccinees developed a rash to several products, and one also developed joint pain. A few individuals developed a positive test result.” IV vaccine could induce tumors.

These two paragraphs are from page 48: Some experts have questioned whether priming with an HIV vaccine can potentiate subsequently acquired natural HIV infection. The historical prototype giving rise to this concern is dengue virus, a tropical viral disease. The presence of serum antibodies induced by a first attack of mild dengue can facilitate the development of severe disease on subsequent infection with a related dengue virus. This “antibody-dependent enhancement” (ADE) of infection can be demonstrated in the laboratory by an increase in growth of virus in cell culture in the presence of antibodies from the serum of exposed individuals. Recipients of envelope vaccines have been shown to develop small amounts of enhancing antibodies. The clinical significance of HIV vaccine-induced ADE is unclear. No direct evidence exists at this time that ADE has any clinical significance. Many scientists consider it to be an unrelated laboratory phenomenon only. Enhancement of disease has not been duplicated with HIV-1 or SIV in primate experiments, although it has been recommended that studies in primate models should continue.

Other mechanisms of Enhanced Disease:
Historically, two other vaccines have been associated with an accompanying subsequent natural infection that is atypically severe: an experimental respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine and a licensed measles virus vaccine. Both were vaccines composed of whole virus inactivated by formalin (like the Salk vaccine). While the mechanisms of disease enhancement remain unclear, they both appear to occur by mechanisms unrelated to ADE of the dengue fever type. The enhance disease experiences with these vaccines were wholly unexpected and have had a significant effect on further vaccine development. For measles, a live attenuated vaccine has supplanted the inactivated vaccine, and currently there is no licensed RSV vaccine. It has been suggested recently that inactivated RSV vaccine. It has been suggested recently that inactivated RSV vaccine may induce inappropriate cytokines, or cell-to-cell communication substances, that are responsible for enhancement.

Translation: These vaccines cause the diseases for which they are meant to prevent. This is what is called “enhancement.’

From page 50:

There is a narrow margin between surviving virus and the destruction of viral immunogenicity; this was highlighted early in the use of licensed polio vaccine when a number of vaccinated individuals developed paralytic poliomyelitis from vaccine lots containing residual live virus. The safety problem was resolved by simple refinements in the inactivation process. By contrast, assuring inactivation of all HIV particles could prove difficult. In particular, concern exists as to whether cell cultures or animal models are sufficiently sensitive to detect the minimal residual live virus capable of infecting humans. There has also been theoretical concern regarding residual reactive viral DNA in the product.

In addition, the safety of the “lymphoblastoid” cell lines used to prepare the virus is unknown. “Adventitious agents,” that is, unwanted agents growing silently in the cell cultures used to prepare vaccine stock, have posed safety problems in the past. As an example, SV40, a monkey tumor virus, contaminated early lots of inactivated polio vaccine prepared in monkey cells.

Live Attenuated Vaccine
Vaccines using live attenuated virus, exemplified by polio or measles vaccines, are capable of producing immune responses that closely mimic the solid, long-term protective immune response afforded by natural viral infection. In addition to a more vigorous and broader antibody response, attenuated virus vaccines may more effectively induce cytotoxic T-lymphocytes and mucosal immunity compared with vaccines composed of inert antigens, such as envelope protein vaccines.

On page 33, however, it is claimed that:

The number of infectious agents for which we have failed to develop a satisfactory vaccine, even those targeted as high priority (49), is far greater than the number for which we have been successful. Examples of VIRUSES for which we have failed include the viruses Herpes simplex, infectious mononucleosis, cytomegalovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, and rotovirus; vaccines against many sexually-transmited disease agents, such as syphilis and gonorrhea; vaccines against parasitic diseases, such as malaria and schistosomiases; and vaccines against numerous bacterial infections, including tuberculosis.

Original antigenic sin (OAS).
HIV infection induces an abundance of antibodies, including neutralizing antibodies: however, several groups have shown that the generation of neutralizaing antibodies tends to lag behind the generation of viral escape mutants by several months or even years. One explanation for this observation involves the phenomenon of original antigenic sin (OAS)_, the fixing of an immune response in a non-adaptive pattern.

Translation: By evoking the concept of “a non-adaptive pattern” is begging immunology to break the rules of what we understand about the immune response. It is interesting it is couched in the term “original sin,” however.

Vaccine-induced OAS may occur when a vaccinated individual is exposed to a noncross reactive strain of HIV that induces the production of antibodies specific for the vaccine strain that are unable to neutralize the newly encountered strain.”

Translation: When exposed to HIV, however, vaccinated individuals exhibiting OAS may be no worse off than unvaccinated individuals because unvaccinated individuals also have a lag in generation of antibody to HIV because their immune response has not been “primed” by vaccination. It is not known whether the lab in antibody production in unvaccinated individuals is greater than the lab in the production of antibody directed by contemporaneous HIV strains in vaccinated individuals exhibiting OAS.”

1995. In Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop., vol. 28, no. 4, Oct-Dec pp. 339-43, 1995, we read:

“The history of previous vaccination [in very early childhood] did not diminish the number of complications of the cases studied.”

Then why vaccinate?

1996 DTAP licensed; recommended for use instead of whole-cell DPT.

1996 Roche warns on its package insert that “The amplicor HIV-1 monitor test is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV, nor as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection” (Roche’s amplicor HIV-1 monitor test package insert, 1996) [a doctor is needed to determine if you are black, hispanic, or gay, and to ask who you slept with in the past].

1996 Hib-HepB combo licensed.

1996 De Serres, Gaston, MD, MPH, Boulianne N., MSC, Duval, B. MD, Déry, P. MD, Rodrigquez, A. M., MD, Massé, R., MD, and Halperin, S. MD, “[Ineffectiveness-emphasis mine] Effectiveness of whole cell pertussis vaccine in child-care centers and schools”, The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, 1996;15:519-524

“Despite the high rate of pertussis vaccine coverage in children between the 2 and 9 years of age, pertussis was a common illness in these preschool and school age children. Although the whole cell vaccine was demonstrated to be effective, estimates of vaccine effectiveness were lower than the estimated in the United States and elsewhere. … In those studies a different whole cell vaccine manufactured by Connaught Laboratories Inc. (Swiftwater, PA) had an efficacy of 48% in Sweden and 36% in Italy.”

1996 872 serious adverse events reported to VAERS in children under 14 years of age who had been injected with hepatitis B vaccine. 48 children were reported to have died after they were injected with hepatitis B vaccine that same year. By contrast, in 1996 only 279 cases of hepatitis B disease were reported in children under age 14.

1996 In 1996 only 54 cases of hepatitis B were reported in the 0-1 age group. There were 3.9 million births that year, so the observed incidence of hepatitis B in the 0-1 age group was just 0.001 %. VAERS received 1,080 total reports of adverse reactions from hepatitis B vaccine in 1996 in that same age group including 47 deaths. The hepatitis B vaccine actually caused more illness than the disease by a 20 to 1 ratio.

1997 “Polio is not eradicated by vaccination, but likely lurks behind a disease redefinition and new diagnostic names like viral or aseptic meningitis…….According to one of the 1997 issues of the MMWR, there are some 30,000 to 50,000 cases of viral meningitis per year in the United States alone. That’s where it is thought that 30,000 – 50,000 cases of polio disappeared after the introduction of mass vaccination.”

“Today, various other forms of the word “polio” are still used to describe the effects of poisoning, though usually with regard to paralysis in animals. A search of Medline (“polio” and “poison”) finds about 45 contemporary articles where poisoning causality is attributed to polio. The terminology found was: “polioencephalomalacia”, “poliomyelomalacia”, “polyradiculoneuritis”, “neurological picture similar to that of poliomyelitis”, “polioencephalomyelomalacia”, “lumbal poliomyelomalacia”, “cerebrocortical necrosis (polioencephalomalacia)”, “Lead poisoning in grey-headed fruit bats (Pteropus poliocephalus)”, “multifocal-poliomyelomalacia”, “spinal poliomalacia”, “Polio and high-sulfate diets”, “atypical porcine enterovirus encephalomyelitis: possible interraction between enteroviruses and arsenicals”, “polioencephalomalacia and photosensitization associated with kochia scoparia consumption in range cattle”, “bovine polioencephalomalacia.” Viral or aseptic meningitis, Guillaine Barre Syndrome (GBS), Chinese paralytic syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, epidemic cholera, cholera morbus, spinal meningitis, spinal apoplexy, inhibitory palsy, intermittent fever, famine fever, worm fever, bilious remittent fever, ergotism, ME, post-polio syndrome, acute flaccid paralysis  (Jim West, Health and Research Publications).

1997 de Melker HE, et al. Pertussis in The Netherlands: an outbreak despite high levels of immunization with whole-cell vaccine. Emerg Infect Dis. 1997 Apr-Jun;3(2):175-8. PMID: 9204299; UI: 97348248.

1997 (April) Bird flu “virus” “H5N1” is isolated for the first time from a human patient in Hong Kong. “The virus” infects 18 patients after close contact with poultry, with six deaths. Fortunately the virus does not spread from person to person. Within three days, Hong Kong’s entire chicken population is slaughtered to prevent further outbreak.

1997 Abbott labs warns that “ELISA testing alone cannot be used to diagnose AIDS” (Abbott Package HIV-I ELISA Test Kit insert, 1997) [a doctor is needed to determine if you are black, hispanic, or gay, and to ask who you slept with in the past].

1997 It is reported that “no seroconversions” were observed among 175 HIV-discordant couples (where one partner tests positive, one negative), for a total of approximately 282 couple-years of follow up in a 10- year study (Padian, et al. Heterosexual Transmission of HIV in Northern California: Results from a Ten-Year Study.” American Journal of Epidemiology. August, 1997).

1997 Epitope warns on its package insert, “Do not use this kit as the sole basis for HIV infection,” (Epitope HIV-I Western Blot Test Kit insert, 1997) [a doctor is needed to determine if you are black, hispanic, or gay, and to ask who you slept with in the past].

1997 News and Views
Nature Medicine 3, 17 – 18 (1997) doi:10.1038/nm0197-17

Live-attenuated HIV vaccines: How safe is safe enough?
Michael Murphey-Corb

Tulane Regional Primate Research Center, 18703 Three Rivers Road, Covington, Louisiana 70433, USA. “A live-attenuated SIV vaccine inducing protection in healthy adult monkeys appears both safe and effective but may be lethal when given in high doses to newborns” (pages 32-36).

1997 “US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld served as Gilead (Research)’s chairman from 1997 until he joined the Bush administration in 2001, and he still holds a Gilead stake valued at between $5 million and $25 million, according to federal financial disclosures filed by Rumsfeld. The forms don’t reveal the exact number of shares Rumsfeld owns. Gilead made a loss in 2003, the year before concern about bird flu started. Then revenues from Tamiflu almost quadrupled, from $35 to $44.6m, helping put the company well into the black. Sales almost quadrupled again, to $161.6m in 2005. Mr Rumsfeld sold some of his Gilead shares in 2004 reaping – according to the financial disclosure report he is required to make each year – capital gains of > $5m (£2.9 m). The report showed that he still had up to $25m-worth of shares at the end of 2004. Rumsfeld isn’t the only political heavyweight benefiting from demand for Tamiflu, which is manufactured and marketed by Swiss pharma giant Roche (Gilead receives a royalty from Roche equaling about 10% of sales). Former Secretary of State George Shultz, who is on Gilead’s board, has sold more than $7 million worth of Gilead since the beginning of 2005. Another board member is the wife of former California Gov. Pete Wilson. In July, the Pentagon ordered $58 million worth of the treatment for U.S. troops around the world, and Congress is considering a multi-billion dollar purchase. Rumsfeld recused himself from any decisions involving Gilead when he left Gilead and became Secretary of Defense in early 2001( http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/31/news/newsmakers/fortune_rumsfeld/index.htm).

1997 Two teams of investigators, one consisting of a French-German collaboration [Gluschankof P, Mondor I, Gelderblom HR, Sattentau QJ. Virology. Mar 31;230(1):125-33, 1997], and another whose investigators were involved in the AIDS Vaccine Program, SAIC, National Cancer Institute-Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center, Maryland [Bess JW Jr, Gorelick RJ, Bosche WJ, Henderson LE, Arthur LO. Virology, Mar 31; 230(1):134-44, 1997], reported that:

PHA (phytohemagglutinin) and IL2 (interleukin-2) stimulated healthy cells to produce Human Immunodeficiency “viral like particles” and the molecular signatures of “HIV” only when stimulated with PHA and IL-2. They also claimed that microvesicles were a source of contaminating cellular proteins found in purified HIV-1 preparations, as their titles of their papers suggest:

Cell membrane vesicles are a major contaminant of gradient-enriched human immunodeficiency virus type-1 preparations” (Gluschankof et al.,1997)..

Microvesicles are a source of contaminating cellular proteins found in purified HIV-1 preparations” (Bess et al., 1997).

This work not only underscored the problem that there are no tissue or cell culture models of “HIV’s pathogenic effect, but these facts raised issue regarding the basis of Gallo’s and Montagnier’s isolation, and challenged Duesberg’s claims that the nucleic acids have been uniquely cloned, discrediting the hypothesis that the signature of “HIV” is due to a specific virus.

In the Bess et al. paper, cellular debris was not distinguishable from other objects in the electron micrographs, and the Bess et al. authors specifically emphasized that:

Identification and analysis of the virus are complicated by the presence of cellular membrane vesicles which COPURIFY (my emphasis) with the virus.

We recently reported a proteolytic procedure (Ott et al., 1995b) that effectively removes greater than 95% of proteins associated with these membrane vesicles. This procedure has allowed us to demonstrate that the cytoskeletal proteins, actin, ezrin, moesin, and cofilin are located in the interior of virions.”

Such “advancements” in “HIV” isolation raised questions such as:

If the cell’s cytoskeletal proteins, actin, exrin, and other proteins are located INSIDE the virions, how can one tell if p24, for instance, which is a faint band on most cellular gels that come from non-”HIV–infected” cells in most labs, if p24 and the other molecules thought to represent the specific molecules of “HIV” aren’t also proteins of cellular origin?

Other issues the Bess et al. paper raised questions regarding why:

PHA activated human PBLs were also shown to produce microvesicles that incorporated cellular proteins” (Fig. 6).

DIVISION OF AIDS (DAIDS) SAYS EVERYBODY’S GOT “HIV’S CAPSID PROTEIN IN THEIR CELLS, BUT TO CONVICT ONLY THOSE WITH MORE THAN 30pg/ml P24 PROTEIN:

1997 The DAIDS official “HIV” culturing manual was published presenting a series of standard protocols for culturing “HIV.” From the Reporting Results Section (section VII), a rationale was presented to unequivocally identify ” HIV-infected” cells as truly “infected” by “HIV” cell culturing labs if:

Two consecutive HIV p24 antigen VQA CORRECTED values of > 30 pg/ml (from a healthy donor source), of which the second value is at least four times greater than the first value or out of range” (O.D.>2) or

Two consecutive HIV p24 antigen VQA CORRECTED values (from a healthy donor source) that are out of range” (Optical density.> 2); or

Three consecutive HIV p24 antigen VQA CORRECTED values of > 30 pg/ml (from a healthy donor source), where neither consecutive value is > four times the previous sample, but the third value is at least four times greater than the first.

1997 Poland, Gregory A., “Still more questions on pertussis vaccines”, The
Lancet, November 29, 1997, Vol. 350, pp. 1564-1565.

“Despite sharply reducing severe pertussis and pertussis deaths, whole-cell vaccines have not stopped circulation of Bordetella in the population, do not induce sustained protective immunity, and are precluded from routine use as boosters in adolescents and adults because of their side-effects. In addition, questions about safety and efficacy remain.”

1998 Hepatitis B Vaccine is linked to autoimmune rheumatoid diseases.

1998 October 15,000 French citizens filed a lawsuit against the French government for understating the risks and overstating the benefits associated with the hepatitis B vaccine. Hundreds of people were reported to have suffered from auto immune and neurological disorders, including multiple sclerosis, following hepatitis B vaccination. As a result, in October 1998, the French Minister of Health ended the mandatory hepatitis B vaccination program for all school children. “The French decision to continue hepatitis B immunization at birth while discontinuing immunization starting at school age suggests the French Ministry of Health may believe that they can decrease vaccine induced autoimmunity by giving vaccines starting in the first month of life. They appear to be accepting our findings” (Classen http://www.healing-arts.org/children/vaccines/vaccines-information.htm).

1998 Although the target population for the hepatitis B vaccine are prostitutes and drug addicts and not children, and France had just repealed the mandate because of high number of vaccine injuries, and the CDC admitted that the vaccine may not be effective after 7 yrs for 30-50% of the people vaccinated, 1998, the hepatitis B Vaccine is mandated for school age children in first 46 and then 48 states in the US.

HIV’s” MOST IMPORTANT MOLECULE, REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE IS FOUND IN CHICKEN VACCINES, AND IS DESTROYED WITH DNASE (reverse transcriptase is a protein, not a nucleic acid that would be sensitive to DNASE):

1998 The Center For Biologics Evaluation and Research Advisory Committee on Vaccines and Related Biological Products claimed in November in a chapter regarding the Update On Reverse Transcriptase Activity In Chicken Cell Derived Vaccines, by Dr. Arifa Khan (pages 13-15), that:

Initially Boni et al. (1996) published that low level reverse transcriptase activity was detected in ALL chicken cell derived vaccines using a highly sensitive PCR-based reverse transcriptase assay called PERT, which can detect one to ten virions which was reported to the WHO, and then additional studies were done by several laboratories in Europe, as well as the U.S., including the NIBSC, the CDC, as well as labs in the FDA to confirm this initial finding. However, after further work, it was discovered that this reverse transcriptase activity could be eliminated by treatment of extracts with DNAase, and that using Alu-based EAV sequence integration studies, that no integration of anything derived from the chicken cell supernatants was detected in Human PBMC cells.

1998 (November) Data from France released at the 62nd Annual Meeting of the American College of Rheumatology, held November 8-12, 1998, in San Diego, California links immunization against hepatitis B to the development of autoimmune rheumatoid diseases such as lupus and rheumatoid arthritis. The rise of autoimmunity following hepatitis B immunization in school children and adults has become a major public health concern. In October, the Ministry of Health in France suspended routine hepatitis B immunization of school children while continuing hepatitis B immunization at birth. The reason for this decision was reportedly the increased risk of autoimmune diseases that has been associated with the vaccine when it is given starting at school age or later. The data from France links hepatitis B immunization to both the development of newly diagnosed cases of autoimmune rheumatoid diseases as well as the exacerbation of previously diagnosed cases that were in remission. This finding is supported by data from Canada published in September which linked immunization against hepatitis B to the development of autoimmune rheumatoid diseases in firefighters.

“The data from humans and animals is very clear, when you stimulate the immune system with vaccines you increase the risk of autoimmunity and exacerbate smoldering inflammatory conditions. Vaccine induced autoimmunity is a major public health problem because of the number of vaccine doses given and the large percentage of people with undiagnosed inflammatory conditions. We need to develop ways of giving vaccines without increasing the risk of autoimmune diseases” (Classen).

1998 Lyme vaccine (Lymerix) licensed.

1998 Paul Offit’s rotavirus vaccine recommended by CDC for universal use in infants.

1998 The Cambridge Biotech HIV-1 Western Blot Kit insert warns: “The clinical implications of antibodies to HIV-1 in an asymptomatic person are not known.” (The Cambridge Biotech HIV-1 Western Blot Kit, 1998).

1998 (August) Paul Offit’s rotavirus vaccine licensed.

1998 (Sept). Johns Hopkins Newsletter Nov. 1998 stated Alzheimer’s incidence would quadruple in coming years. According to Hugh Fudenberg, MD (the world’s leading immunogeneticist, author of nearly 850 papers in peer-reviewed journals): “Individuals who have had five consecutive flu shots between 1970 and 1980 (years studied) have a ten times higher chance of getting Alzheimer’s disease than if they had one, two or no shots… due to the mercury and aluminum in every flu shot. The gradual mercury and aluminum buildup in the brain causes cognitive dysfunction.”

Also in 1998, the head of the Swiss and European Blood Banks, the late Dr. Alfred Hassig (1921-1999) and his associates, including Dr. Hans Kremer (a specialist in drug addiction medicine), and a virologist (Stephan Lanka), made a series of claims suggesting that:

The question of the specificity of the anti-HIV antibody test has to be re-evaluated as it was shown that the viral enrichment obtained from co-cultivations of patients lymphocytes with fetal cord blood by Barre-Sinouussi et al. and leukaemia cells by Gallo et al., exclusively consisted of proteins of the cell types used in the cell culture. This precludes a clear separation of presumed retroviral and cellular proteins or extracellular matrix proteins. In this context it was shown that the anti-HIV antibody test detects autoimmune antibodies directed against cytoskeletal proteins e.g. the liver cells. Strongly augmented anti-actin autoantibodies is considered close to pathognomonic for chronically active hepatitis. The original assumption that reverse transcription from RNA to DNA is evidence for the existence of retroviruses was wrong. In fact reverse transcription is a vital mechanism for the maintenance of the genome. The decrease in numbers of circulating lymphocytes can be explained by a stress-induced hyper-cortisolism. Up to date, direct HIV-mediated destruction of CD4 lymphocytes could not be proved. The same is true for the measuring of the “viral load.” Shortcomings of the applied method to quantify the “viral load” do not permit definitive conclusions. Possibly, it may be taken as an expression of a stress induced weakening of the cellular immune reactions, in the course of which, nucleoside fragments resulting from the current cell turnover are inadequately eliminated. Furthermore, the treatment of patients with nucleoside analogs has a toxic effect on both the genome of the cell nucleus and the mitochondria. The latter, therefore, may produce insufficient amounts of ATP, causing organ failure and, eventually, death. The synthetic protease inhibitors used these days are associated with serious side-effects. Therefore, it seems worthwhile, in these patients, to bring back the catabolic situation of whole body inflammation to homeostasis by administering anabolic phyto-polyenolic compounds.”

In March, 1998 an “AIDS Alert” article on rapid tests appeared claiming:

Whether the tests will perform as well in the United States as they have abroad is still unknown, experts add. For one thing, using a single rapid test in a low-prevalence population will give a lower positive predictive value….That error rate won’t matter much in areas with a high prevalence of HIV because in all probability the people testing false-positive will have the disease. But if the same test was performed on 1,000 white, affluent suburban housewives – a low-prevalence population – in all likelihood all positive results will be false, and positive predictive values plummet to zero. (Coming to your clinic: Candidates for Rapid Tests. Aids Alert, March 1998).

Translation: This is why the test kits cannot diagnose “HIV” infection: the physician has to observe with his own eyes if the person is black, histpanic, homosexual, and ask whom they slept with last night to diagnose “HIV/AIDS.”

HOW I LEARNED TO READ “AIDS” SCIENCE: DETERMINING SEROCONVERSION FROM VACCINES VERSUS TRUE “HIV” INFECTION DEPENDS ON WHAT SIZE YOUR CITY IS, COMMUNICATION, AND EMERGENCY PHONE NUMBERS.

http://wwwn.cdc.gov/MLP/pdf/labhiv/TEvans.pdf.

1998 CONFERENCE ON THE LABORATORY SCIENCE OF HIV HIV TESTING IN HIV-VACCINATED POPULATIONS. Thomas G. Evans, M.D., University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, Wednesday, September 16, 1998.

Many problems arise in relation to vaccine test- ing and HIV 1 serology. Among the most complicated of these is the possibility of false HIV positive results appearing on serological tests.

Such a result can have a number of possible consequences, including constraints on international travel, blood donation, military service, or health and life insurance. In addition, there can be discrimination from friends, employers and family.

Such problems are only likely to become more magnified as increased testing of HIV 1 vaccine candidates moves into further Phase I , II, and III trials.

At present there are six NIH-funded Phase I clinical trial sites of candidate HIV vaccines in the United States. These include the University of Rochester, Vanderbilt University, University of Washington, the University of Alabama at Birmingham, St. Louis University, and Johns Hopkins University. These sites are primarily responsible for the Phase I and II trials that take place inside the AIDS Vaccine Evaluation Group (AVEG) of the NIH. These sites have been conducting trials of candidate HIV vaccines since 1998. There have been over 30 clinical trials which have used a variety of different vaccine approaches including subunit vaccines, peptide-based systems, canary pox vectors that encode most of the genes of HIV, Vaccinia vectors which also have encoded multiple genes, DNA vaccines, mucosal vaccines, Salmonella-based vaccines, and multiclade-based vaccines. To complicate matters further, these candidate vaccines have been given with over 10 different experimental adjuvants in these trials.

The number of patients tested to date in these Phase I trials is not small. As of October 1998 over 2,600 seronegative volunteers had been enrolled in candidate HIV 1 vaccine trials. The majority of these volunteers have received vaccine and not placebo. Of these vaccines, approximately 2,000 were at low risk and approximately 500 at high risk. However, even low risk patients have some exposure risk. Evaluation in the AVEG reveals HIV 1 seroincidence in these Phase I trials ranging from 0.22% for low risk individuals, up to 1.46% in the high risk individuals.

In these trials 32 individuals have become infected with HIV 1.

This rate of infection potentially leads to a fairly major problem, that is, during vaccine trials, especially high risk trials, there may be positive serology both from infection and from the vaccine itself. Distinguishing between these two conditions is obviously critically important.

What percent of individuals that receive candidate HIV 1 vaccines will actually test positive?

The answer to this question lies in the serological tests used. (1)

When extremely specific serological tests are used which include reagents not included in the

vaccine, the number of individuals testing positive is extremely low.

However, when cell lysates or first or second generation ELISA tests are used, the rate can be fairly high. In initial trials of HIV 1 vaccines conducted in the early 1990’s, approximately one half of all recipients of subunit gp160 and gp 120 vaccines tested positive by the Abbot HIV 1 second generation test at the time of their peak neutralization titer.

However, now that these test kits are using synthetic peptides, the rate of testing positive has decreased. When tests are used based on the Sanufi kit which includes the immunodominant portions of gp41 and areas of pol, there is essentially little to no cross-reactivity with the gp120 vaccines.

All gp160 vaccines that include the immunodominant epitopes of gp41 will tend to be problematic due to the fact that almost all commercially available testing is based on the that immunodominant sequence.

In recent vaccine trials using canary pox vectors which encode multiple HIV genes and are boosted with gp120 subunits (“prime-boost”), the number of volunteers testing positive by the Abbot HIV 1/2 EIA is approximately 50% at the time of peak antibody titer.

Persistence of these vaccine-induced antibody responses is quite variable. The antibody responses that are induced by subunit vaccines decline quickly over a three month to one year period.

However, volunteers from AVEG trial 002, who received Vaccinia products which encoded gp160 and were boosted with subunit gp160 have had persistent antibody responses seen up to 10 years later.

Are there any major implications for the numbers of individuals vaccinated?

In small cities such as Rochester and Nashville, the location of two of the AVEG units, it can be estimated that up to 100 people could have been positive due to vaccine trials rather than true infection when using blood bank screening methodologies that use an ELISA.

In areas where only 2-3,000 individuals may be HIV positive, this could represent a significant number of the positive tests seen in the testing sites (vaccine-induced positives or “real positives-doesn’t say).

Therefore, in cities that have vaccine units, close communication between health departments and the vaccine testing site is needed. Initially the number of such sites was relatively limited. They included the six AVEG sites mentioned above and the Phase II/III HIVNET sites in Chicago, San Francisco, New York, Denver, Philadelphia, Boston, Providence and Seattle.

However, with the initiation of the VaxGen Phase III efficacy trial of the bivalent gp120 subunit vaccine, the number of potentially affected individuals has markedly increased. This trial will enroll approximately 5,000 individuals in 50-60 centers across the United States. Two out of every three recipients will receive vaccine for a total vaccinated population of 3,333. Since the vaccine includes only the gp120 subunit, it would seem relatively simple to establish that a positive ELISA is not vaccine-[induced] by use of Western blot.

However, in AVEG trials anywhere from 10-20% of individuals have a random falsely positive band at p24.

If criteria are employed for interpreting Western blot which include one envelope band and a p24 band, then a large number of individuals that are vaccinated in this trial could eventually test positive if the Western Blot was interpreted by an inexperienced or uninformed interpreter.

This trial will be further complicated by the fact that individuals will be receiving booster vaccines over three years and are likely to have high titer gp120 antibody responses during this entire vaccine period.

The persistence of these vaccine responses after three years of immunization is not known at present.

Do such false positive misinterpretations occur?

A number of these have occurred within the AVEG. One was published in the Lancet a year ago by Dr. David Schwartz from Johns Hopkins University.(2) In addition, a patient volunteer at another site who received a gp160 Vaccinia based vaccine with a gp160 boost had a Western blot interpreted as positive in a well known research laboratory in the United States. He had an RNA PCR done which was also interpreted as positive. Follow-up at the site revealed his Western blot had not changed since vaccination.

Two further RNA PCRs, a DNA PCR, and a CD8+ co-culture revealed that this individual was not infected. However, he behaved as if he had been infected for over a six month period. The cost of this workup was many thousands of dollars.

It should be understood that this workup occurred approximately six years after initial vaccination. Thus, the potential problems from false positives are truly real. Basing tests on RNA PCR is also somewhat problematic. This is due to the fact that in some of the best surveys at present approximately 1-2% of seronegative individuals may test falsely positive by RNA PCR.

Although these false positives tend to have low absolute numbers (<10,000 copies), they can be problematic. For example, a physician may interpret an early ELISA or Western blot as potentially positive. An RNA PCR could be done which is also falsely positive.

If that individual was quickly placed on very highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), as is now recommended, this could lead to a confusing situation. There may be no further seroconversion, negative follow-up PCR, and the physician or health care worker may inappropriately interpret the person as a transient infection and leave the patient on potentially toxic antiretroviral therapy.

Such a scenario is not only somewhat likely but even probable with the number of individuals that will enter vaccine trials.

What are the solutions to some of these problems?

The AVEG has used a photo identification card and an 800 telephone number. If a volunteer experiences social harm or problems, the number is called and an intervention can occur. We have been successful at notifying insurance companies, employers, and other parties who have falsely interpreted vaccine-induced positive serology as being indicative of HIV 1 infection.

The NIH has also stated that it will provide follow-up in NIH-sponsored vaccine trials as long as the individual tests seropositive by any conventional test used and licensed by the FDA.

However, this may be more problematic because as individual pharmaceutical companies begin to undertake trials, the long-term follow-up of individuals in these company based trials is not entirely clear. This situation is under consideration by the CDC, and appropriate guidelines will need to be developed.

It is also clear that as trials move forward, thought must be given to the methodology used to differentiate between seroconversion from the vaccine and from true infection.

In the NIH-sponsored AVEG trials, an infection algorithm has been established, and can be accessed on the World Wide Web at http://www.emmes.com/avctn.

This algorithm is then adapted specifically for each protocol depending upon the vaccine candidate that is tested. For some vaccines a serological test can be a useful screen. There are a number of ELISA kits that are based merely on the gp41 subunit. Most of these are not presently licensed in the United States but can be used for research purposes. For example if the Sanufi kit based on the gp41 and pol peptides is used, the number of serological false positives tend to be very low. Other kits made by other manufacturers that do not include pol are also quite useful.

However, the use of full length envelope vaccines that encode gp41, or the use of gp160 subunits can complicate the use of such serological testing.

As previously stated, using the AVEG algorithms no identification of HIV 1 infection is ever made based on a single nucleic acid test. The belief is that the false positive rate is too high to take any chances on a single test.

In addition, the FDA has not approved any nucleic acid based test as a diagnostic test for HIV 1.

Lastly, the AVEG and NIH are working in conjunction with CDC to test a number of rapid testing kits from different manufacturers around the world using sera from different vaccine trials.

We hope to come up with specific algorithms that may work in the future.

Dr. Robert Belshe and Robert Stein, Esq. of the AVEG have taken the lead in suggesting to the FDA language which is to be placed in the packaging of test kits. This exact language is now found in almost all test kits licensed in the United States. It is as follows: “A person who has antibodies to HIV 1 is assumed to be infected with the virus, except for a person who has participated in an HIV vaccine study may develop antibodies to the vaccine, and may or may not be infected with HIV.

Clinical correlation is indicated with appropriate counseling, medical evaluation, and additional testing to decide whether a diagnosis of HIV infection is accurate”. This FDA language is included in the Sanufi kit, the Abbott kit, the Home Access kit, and the Murex SUDS kit. The use of multiple rapid testing mechanisms that are based on peptide based sequences will also be extremely useful in algorithms for evaluating vaccine induced responses.

It is also hoped that language similar to the above statement would be included in any algorithms adopted by the United States or the Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL). Further information concerning the complex interaction between HIV candidate vaccines and serological testing can be found at the EMMES Corporation web site at http://www.emmes.com and at the NIH infor- mation number for serological testing, Ms. Mary Allen, 301-402-0846.

In summary, when interpreting potential positive responses of HIV 1 serology, there is a need to remember the large number of vaccine recipients in the United States. The possibility for vaccine induced false positive responses will increase as further trials are undertaken in the United States.

References

1. Belshe RB, Clements ML, Keefer MC, Graham BS, Corey L, Sposto R, Wescott S,

Lawrence D, NIAID AIDS Vaccine Clinical Trials Group. Interpreting HIV serodiagnostic test

results in the l990s: Social risks of HIV vaccine studies in uninfected volunteers. Ann Intern

Med 1994:121:584-589.

2. Schwartz DH, Laeyendeckar OB, Arango-Jaramillio S, Castillo RC, Reynolds MJ. Extensive evaluation of a seronegative participant in an HIV-1 vaccine trial as a result of false-positive PCR. Lancet 1997;350:25- 259.

1999 It was published in The Journal, AIDS, that children born to ZDV-treated mothers:

are more likely to have a rapid course of HIV-1 infection compared with children born to untreated mothers, as disease progression and immunological deterioration are significantly more rapid and the risk of death is actually increased during the first 3 years of life.”

In 1999, it was also known that goat and cow proteins cause “HIV-positive” reactions

On August 3, 1999, Dr. Howard Urnovitz testifies before The Committee On Government Reform that he doesn’twant to vaccinate people against their own genes to cause adverse events with “HIV subtype O.” Here is the written testimony of Dr. Howard B. Urnovitz to the Committee On Government Reform and Oversight was presented claiming that:

House of Representatives I am grateful to this committee for allowing me to address the issue of vaccine safety. I am Dr. Howard B. Urnovitz. In 1979, I received my doctorate degree in Microbiology and Immunology from the University of Michigan, where I studied vaccines. I am testifying today as the Scientific Director of the Chronic Illness Research Foundation. For the record, I am also the chief science officer of a biotechnology corporation.

My testimony will describe the insights of recent scientific studies into the health consequences of exposing individuals to both toxic and foreign biologic materials, particularly multiple bacterial and live virus vaccines. The conventional wisdom concerning the use of vaccines needs to be reconsidered, taking into account the adverse medical effects that vaccines can have on the human body. Vaccine science must evaluate not only acute adverse side effects, but also possible associated chronic illnesses such as learning and behavior disorders, Autism Spectrum Disorders, intussusception, arthritis, cancer, diabetes, chronic fatigue syndrome, multiple sclerosis, autoimmune thyroiditis, and other chronic health problems. These chronic illnesses are increasingly costly to society in both human and financial terms.

By year’s end, the Chronic Illness Research Foundation and its research colleagues will have published four peer-reviewed papers on the genetic basis of four different chronic diseases: vaccine associated human cancers, Gulf War Syndrome, multiple sclerosis, and AIDS. The implications of these findings for vaccine safety are:

1. the human body retains a genetic memory of the foreign substances to which it has been exposed, including viral and bacterial vaccines;
2. each individual responds to foreign substances differently, based on his or her own unique genetic background;
3. there appears to be a limit on how much foreign material to which the human body can be exposed before some level of genetic damage occurs and a chronic disease initiates.

It is known that our genetic blueprints for life, received from our mother and father, create new genetic material, allowing each individual to cope with toxic environmental exposures. Research needs to focus more intensely on precisely how the body handles the unprecedented level of gene-damaging substances in our air, water, food and even some medicines. These substances range from infectious agents, both natural and vaccine-related; pesticides, herbicides, petroleum byproducts and other synthetic chemical hazards; and physical hazards such as radiation. Regarding vaccine safety, I suggest the initiation of serious inquiries into the following research areas:

1. How do genes change in response to vaccines, and what are the chronic consequences of these changes?
2. What are the acceptable limits of dose, age, timing, and combinations of vaccines that the body can handle? (Not only with respect to their ability to create an immune response to the infectious agent, but also with respect to their acute and chronic health effects).
3. How might we minimize vaccine adverse effects on our genome through life style, diet, and pharmaceutical intervention?
4. How can we repair or minimize the effects of genetic damage?

Today, we are beginning to understand the indirect mechanisms that link toxic exposures and chronic disorders. Unfortunately, efforts by scientists to explore fully the possible negative effects of vaccines mandated by public policy has been met with stiff resistance by public health agencies.

Let me give you two examples of vaccine programs that are underway that lack a solid scientific foundation. First, several of my colleagues and I currently have a peer-reviewed paper in a major medical journal due out in September that contains the medical profile of a woman who died from a mysterious case of AIDS. Over several years, her laboratory tests showed a consistent pattern of negative or indeterminate HIV-1 blood antibody tests.

However, when an alternative fluid test was used, she was HIV-1 antibody positive in her urine. The virus was eventually isolated from this woman and sequenced. This HIV-1 variant came to be known as HIV-1 Group O. Analyses of the viral genetic material suggest that the virus originated, in part, from genetic reshuffling of human chromosomal material. HIV-1 could have serious consequences with respect to the initiation of autoimmune diseases. To put it simply, are we embarking on a course that will vaccinate people against their own genes?

The second example concerns the intensive effort to create a vaccine for the hepatitis C virus. If you read the literature very carefully, you will find that, while there is a strong marker for the disease, there is no hard scientific evidence to support the existence of a hepatitis C virus. Clearly, a non-A, non-B hepatitis disease exists, but the science behind an associated virus is weak at best. As a scientist I am compelled to ask, how can we vaccinate people against a disease-causing agent that has not been fully characterized?

Protecting the public against vaccine related chronic diseases is and will be a difficult task. Not only must researchers meet the scientific challenges, but increasingly they also must battle the politics of science. Research is showing that our understanding of chronic diseases, as illustrated by my two examples, often is seriously inadequate. Because the issue of vaccine safety involves both policy and science, the public needs to be better represented in the decisions made by public health agencies. In this realm, where science and politics collide, Congress should take a more active role in representing the public interest during the formulation of public health policies.

On the issue of informed consent: Had my mother and father known that the poliovirus vaccines of the 1950s were heavily contaminated with more than 26 monkey viruses, including the cancer virus SV40, I can say with certainty that they would not have allowed their children and themselves to take those vaccines. Both of my parents might not have developed cancers suspected of being vaccine-related, and might even be alive today. Government, industry, and medicine should embrace the ethical principle of informed consent about possible adverse reactions associated with vaccines.

I appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you my research findings that span a quarter of a century. I will continue to work with my colleagues to unravel the links between toxic exposures and chronic illnesses. While others seek to map the human genome, our goal is to study the detours the human body’s genes must take to survive in an increasingly toxic environment. I ask that the full text of my statement be submitted for inclusion in the record of this hearing. Thank you.

1999 Tomaszunas-Blaszczyk J Zaklad [Pertussis in 1997]. Epidemiologii Panstwowego, Zakladu Higieny, Warszawa. Przegl Epidemiol 1999;53(1-2):23-32 [Article in Polish]

In 1997 an epidemic increase of pertussis was observed in Poland. The incidence was 5.4/100,000 population and was more than six times higher than in the preceding year. No clear reason for a sudden increase in pertussis incidence was found, in particular the vaccination coverage rates have remained high. In December 1997 the DTP vaccine coverage rate for children below two with four doses of DTP was 97.5%. The distribution of cases according to age during the last 20 years was analysed and it was shown that since the beginning of the ’90 a growing proportion of cases occurs among fully vaccinated children and the average age of the cases has a steadily growing tendency.

1999 (October) Paul Offit’s rotavirus vaccine pulled off the market due to significant adverse reactions such as perforation of the intestine.

1999 The Lancet Volume 353, Number 9150 30 January 1999. Risk of diphtheria among school children in the Russian Federation in relation to time since last vaccination.

Quote:
“In 1993, the Russian Federation reported 15,229 cases of diphtheria, a 25-fold increase over the 603 cases reported in 1989.1 The incidence rate among children 7-10 years of age (15·7 per 100000) was twice that of adults aged 18 years or over (7·9 per 100000).4 81% of the affected children aged 7-10 years had been vaccinated with at least a primary series of diphtheria toxoid, and most had received the first booster recommended to be given 12 months after completion of the primary series.”

So, it’s pretty hard to ascribe low immunization rates as a cause for the outbreak of Diptheria. A much more likely explanation is the social disruption that was going on at the time of great political upheaval. Breakdown of hygiene, poverty, etc.”

1999 It is published that children who drink goats and cows milk sometimes test “HIV-positive” (Willman et al., Heterophile Antibodies to Bovine and Caprine Proteins Causing False-Positive Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 and Other. Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay Results. Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology, p. 615-616, Vol. 6, No. 4, July 1999).

1999 (May 18) Testimony of Dr. Jane Orient, MD, President of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), on the “Hepatitis B Vaccine: held by the Criminal Justice, Drug Policy & Human Resources Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Reform in the U.S. House of Representatives:

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: My name is Jane Orient, M.D. I am a practicing internist from Tucson, Arizona, and serve as the Executive Director of the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons (“AAPS”).

For most children, the risk of a serious vaccine reaction may be 100 times greater than the risk of hepatitis B. Overall, the incidence of hepatitis B in the U.S. is currently about 4 per 100,000. The risk for most young children is far less; hepatitis B is heavily concentrated in groups at high risk due to occupation, sexual promiscuity, or drug abuse. VAERS contains 25,000 reports related to hepatitis B vaccine (in 1999-it is about 40,000 as of 2003), about 1/3 of which were serious enough to lead to an emergency room visit, hospitalization, or death. It is often assumed that only 10% of reactions are reported.”

Striking increases in chronic illnesses have occurred in temporal association with an increase in vaccination rates. Asthma and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, causes of lifelong morbidity and frequent premature death, have nearly doubled in incidence since the introduction of many new, mandatory vaccines. There is no explanation for this increase. The temporal association (with universal hepatitis B vaccination), although not probative, is suggestive and demands intense investigation. Instead of following up on earlier, foreign studies suggesting a greater-than-chance association, the CDC, through vaccine mandates, is obliterating the control group (unvaccinated children).”

Nonetheless, the implications are so grave that immediate investigation is needed. Measles, mumps, rubella, hepatitis B, and the whole panoply of childhood diseases are a far less serious threat than having a large fraction (say 10%) of a generation afflicted with learning disability and/or uncontrollable aggressive behavior because of an impassioned crusade for universal vaccination. There are plausible mechanisms such as molecular mimicry whereby vaccines could have such effects. Basic research, as well as epidemiologic studies (starting with a long-term follow-up of reactions reported to VAERS), is urgent.”

Dr. Orient concludes her assessment and condemnation of the mandated hepatitis B vaccine thus to the Criminal Justice, Drug Policy & Human Resources Subcommittee:

“AAPS opposes federal mandates for vaccines, on principle, on the grounds that they are:

1.An unconstitutional expansion of the power of the federal government.
2.An unconstitutional delegation of power to a public – private partnership.
3.An unconstitutional and destructive intrusion into the patient-physician and parent-child relationships.
4. A violation of the Nuremberg Code in that they force individuals to have medical treatment against their will, or to participate in the functional equivalent of a vast experiment without fully informed consent.
5. A violation of rights to free speech and to the practice of one’s religion (which may require one to keep oaths).”

1999 (April) Journal of Infectious Diseases, vol. 179,; 915-923. “Temporal trends in the population structure of bordetella pertussis during 1949-1996 in a highly vaccinated population.

Despite the introduction of large-scale pertussis vaccination in 1953 and high vaccination coverage, pertussis is still an endemic disease in The Netherlands, with epidemic outbreaks occurring every 3-5 years.” One factor that might contribute to this is the ability of pertussis strains to adapt to vaccine-induced immunity, causing new strains of pertussis to re-emerge in this well-vaccinated population.

1999 (Sept) “There are no data or evidence of any harm caused by the level of exposure that some children may have encountered in following the existing immunization schedule. Infants and children who have received thimerosal-containing vaccines do not need to be tested for mercury exposure.” Joint Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and JAMA.

1999 Kirchner, Jeffrey T., “Manifestations of Pertussis in Immunized Children and Adults”, American Family Physician, November 1, 1999, Vol. 60, p. 2150.

1999 Bykowski, M., “Pertussis in Adults”, OB GYN News, November 1, 1999,
Vol. 34, p. 29

“It was formerly believed that infection or immunization conferred lifetime immunity, but now appears that any resultant immunity is in fact short lived. Thus, there is a growing interest in the selective reimmunization of adults, he said. And while pertussis was once considered uncommon in adults and older adolescents, it’s now believed that the disease is endemic in these populations, who actually serve as the primary reservoir for pertussis, explained Dr. Ogle, professor of pediatrics at the University of Colorado, Denver. Studies from throughout the developed world suggest a 25%-30% of persistent coughing illness in these age groups is pertussis, he added.”

1999 In a review of the early polio era, Hans J. Eggers (Milestones in Early Poliomyelitis Research, 1840 to 1949, Journal of Virology, June 1999, p. 4533-4535, Vol. 73, No. 60) the following claims were made, although they were not entirely accurate especially with regards to Ender’s group’s contributions and conclusions, albeit the conclusions appeared in the Journal Virology:

The history of the etiology of poliomyelitis is a history of errors. I mention only the “coccus era,” when several investigators were prejudiced by a supposed parallelism between poliomyelitis and meningitis epidemica.”

However, all in all, bacteriological findings were negative; likewise, attempts to transmit the disease to the usual laboratory animals, such as rabbits, guinea pigs, or mice, failed. Landsteiner and Popper (14) injected intraperitoneally into two Old World monkeys (Cynocephalus hamadryas and Macacus rhesus) a suspension of spinal cord from a 9-year-old boy who had succumbed to severe poliomyelitis after four days of illness. The two monkeys, in good condition, had been available from previous experiments with syphilis. The inoculated material, which was bacteriologically sterile, yielded negative results when injected into rabbits, guinea pigs, and mice. The two monkeys, however, exhibited lesions in the spinal cord, medulla, pons, and brain stem that were indistinguishable from those observed in cases of human poliomyelitis. One of the monkeys, the rhesus monkey, developed complete flaccid paralysis of both legs. Landsteiner and Popper were unable to passage the agent, but this was achieved soon afterward and independently in 1909 by Römer (22), Flexner and Lewis (8), Leiner and von Wiesner (15), and Landsteiner and Levaditi (13)”

As early as 1910, Flexner and Lewis (9) had cautiously suggested that poliovirus gained access to the central nervous system via the nasal mucosa, a hypothesis supported by experiments with monkeys performed by Flexner’s group and by Leiner and von Wiesner: swabs containing poliovirus were introduced into the nose and rubbed vigorously over the upper nasal mucous membrane, with ensuing clinical poliomyelitis. Flexner’s views on the strict neurotropism of poliovirus and on its entry into the body by the nasal route (see above) dominated poliovirology so that other experimental evidence was more or less neglected for about 25 years until the 1930s. In particular, the exciting results of a young Swedish team consisting of Carl Kling, Wilhelm Wernstedt, and Alfred Pettersson published in 1912 (11, 12) were disregarded: the authors had demonstrated poliovirus in fatal and nonfatal cases of poliomyelitis, not only as expected from the oropharynx and trachea but also from the small intestine. Certainly, one possible interpretation of the presence of virus in the intestines was that it had been swallowed. But the clue of poliovirus present in the intestines and its pathogenic significance was not seriously pursued. Revival of poliovirus infection as an intestinal disease came mainly from the work of Trask and Paul at Yale University (20) and the definite report by Albert Sabin and Robert Ward in 1941 (26) on the natural history of human poliomyelitis. By meticulous technique (the authors performed necropsies of fatal polio cases themselves), they proved that the virus is distributed predominantly in two systems: (i) certain regions of the nervous system and (ii) the alimentary tract.”

The presence of virus in the walls of the alimentary tract appeared to be the primary localization and portal of entry. Virus was absent in the nasal mucosa, olfactory bulbs, and anterior perforated substance, which suggested that neither the upper respiratory tract nor the olfactory pathway is of significance in cases of natural human poliomyelitis.”

Another highpoint of poliovirus research was the finding in 1931 by the Australians Frank M. Burnet and Jean Macnamara (4) that there existed antigenic differences between strains of poliovirus. So far, a complete similarity of the different strains had been assumed. The Australian authors compared the famous Rockefeller MV strain with a local strain isolated in Melbourne and found striking differences in cross-immunity experiments and neutralization tests in monkeys. The report was treated with scepticism, since it came from unknown investigators on a remote continent. But in light of the ill-fated vaccine trials of 1935, the significance of this finding was particularly realized by Hammon, Francis, and Rivers (2). Finally, the question was settled by the Committee on Typing of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis early in the 1950s (5).”

A further highlight of poliovirus research was the adaption of the Lansing strain of poliovirus to mice by the persistent efforts of Charles Armstrong in 1939 (1). This meant that at least one strain of poliovirus was available for research purposes in an animal far less expensive than the monkey.”

Some years earlier Maurice Brodie et al. (3) had already tried with ingenious techniques to reproduce poliovirus in mice for Brodie’s vaccine trials, but with the vaccine failures this work was neglected. All the more must Armstrong’s persistence be admired. In this context it should be mentioned that Max Theiler (quoted by Paul [20]) in analogy to his work on yellow fever formed more than 150 mouse passages of the Lansing strain and observed a dramatic attenuation-a term used first by John Kolmer of Philadelphia- in connection with poliomyelitis vaccines of the virus after intracerebral inoculation of monkeys with results of from 100 to 0% paralysis. In passing, I should like to mention that among all contemporary virologists, it was Max Theiler and likewise John Enders who were highly regarded by Albert Sabin.”

There were attempts as early as 1913 by Constantin Levaditi (16) to replicate poliovirus in tissue culture. But as Sabin and Olitsky (25) stated in their famous paper of 1936, “there is no unequivocal evidence that the virus of poliomyelitis has as yet been successfully cultivated outside the body.”

Sabin and Olitsky used various carefully dissected tissues of 3- to 4-month-old human embryos, e.g., brain and cord, lungs, kidney, liver, and spleen. The virus was the already mentioned MV (mixed virus) strain of the Rockefeller Institute, a virus mixture prepared by H. L. Amoss in 1914 and kept for decades through numerous intracerebral passages in monkeys (23). The authors found that the virus multiplied readily only in the presence of nervous tissue, as evidenced by experiments with monkeys, including neutralization tests. The experiment appeared interesting at the time but of no practical value.”

Despite this depressing failure and in view of the mounting evidence of the extraneural multiplication of poliovirus (see above), John Enders and his young collaborators Thomas Weller and Frederick Robbins made further attempts to cultivate poliovirus in vitro, in particular after Weller’s successful cultivation of mumps virus in vitro. Enders and coworkers (7) demonstrated the dramatic replication of Lansing virus (testable in mice) in human embryonic cultures composed chiefly of skin, muscle, and connective tissue from the arms and legs, in cultures of human embryonic intestine, and in those of nervous tissue. It was Robbins who first recognized differences in cell morphology between inoculated and uninoculated cultures (24a). Enders coined the term cytopathic effects (CPE).”

The implications of this famous paper, published in Science on 28 January 1949, were enormous and well recognized by the authors but surprisingly not by all colleagues in poliomyelitis research, at least initially. Enders et al. readily demonstrated the multiplication of all three poliovirus types in various primate tissues, in particular in nonnervous tissues, and showed that large amounts of virus could be propagated in vitro, that cultures most sensitive to the isolation of virus could be obtained in abundant amounts, and that precise quantitation of infectious virus could easily be achieved. Furthermore, besides Gilbert Dalldorf’s and Grace Sickles’ (6) isolation in newborn mice of coxsackieviruses, another major group of enteroviruses pathogenic for humans, the soon to be recognized potential of cell culture techniques led to the discovery of echoviruses, likewise important agents of human disease.”

2000 (September) “UNINFECTED” WOMEN TEND TO TEST POSITIVE: In 2000, it was reported that pregnant women test positive for “HIV” at high frequency, and the appearance of the so-called specific and unique antigens of an “HIV’s” molecular signature thus shares common molecular epitopes (molecular configurations) with those detected during pregnancy of certain women. In September, the study was published in The Archives of Family Medicine about false positive and indeterminate HIV test results in pregnant women: As the number of women being screened has increased, the proportion of false-positive and ambiguous (indeterminate) test results has increased….”(Archives of Family Medicine, Sep/Oct 2000).

2000 (July) The first of many failures of of genital lesion-causing microbicides on Africans was reported from a study of several microbicide trials funded by The Gates foundation, where it was claimed that spermicide doesn’t actually reduce any risk of transmission of “HIV’s” molecular profiles, but actually increased the rate of the appearance of its profiles. This finding ran contrary to what is known about how safe sex practices, including condoms and spermicide (Maggie Fox. Spermicide worsens HIV risk, study finds. Reuters 12 July 2000):

2000 (March 21)) The Los Angeles Times (Paul Jacobs, Peter G. Gosselin, Times Staff Writers) reported that: Scientists have uncovered what they believe are glaring errors in a patent issued last month to Human Genome Sciences Inc. for a human gene that plays a crucial role in AIDS. Errors Found in Patent for AIDS Gene, Scientists Say; News comes amid concerns that genomics race could lead to shoddy science and profiteering. A few excerpts:

“When we file a patent, we don’t claim the sequence as the invention,” said William A. Haseltine, chairman and chief executive of the Rockville, Md., company, which has filed about 7,500 gene patents. “The invention we claim is the gene we deposit with the ATCC. We know that our sequence and most sequences are not perfect.”
“Genomics companies such as Human Genome Sciences and its competitors Celera Genomics and Incyte Pharmaceuticals are able to cast a broad net and haul in genes and gene fragments by the tens of thousands, using automated machines to spell out genetic code and sophisticated software to make reasonable guesses about their function.”

In the months after the company filed its patent, however, other researchers at several academic centers, including the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center in New York and the NIH, made a remarkable series of discoveries about how HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, enters living cells, the first step in an infection.”

Unaware of the company’s patent application, these scientists found and isolated a protein that the virus requires for entry–the CCR5 receptor. And they isolated the gene that carries the instructions for building the receptor. A drug that can block the protein could be a new weapon against AIDS.”…’The fight going on now is not a disinterested fight about who gets credit for it, but who gets money for it,’ Haseltine said.”

1999/2000 A Joint Statement by the U.S. Public Health Service, the AAFP, the AAP, and ACIP urging manufacturers to remove the preservative thimerosal (ethyl mercury) as soon as possible from vaccines routinely recommended for infants.

2000 Prevnar (pneumococcal conjugate vaccine) licensed.

2000 CDC recommends use of IPV instead of OPV (polio vaccine).
2000 At a San Diego research meeting on autism, Dr. Stephanie Cave presented the following information:

“By the age of two, American children have received 237 micrograms of mercury through vaccines alone, which far exceeds current EPA ‘safe’ levels of 0.1 mcg/kg. per day. That’s one-tenth of a microgram, not one microgram.” “Three days in particular may be singled out as spectacularly toxic for infants:

“Day of birth: hepatitis B—12 mcg mercury (30 times safe level).

“At 4 months: DTaP and HiB on same day—50 mcg mercury (60 times safe level).

“At 6 months: Hep B, Polio—62.5 mcg mercury (78 times safe level).

“At 15 months the child received another 50 mcg (41 times safe level).

“These figures are calculated for an infant’s average weight in kilograms for each age. These one-day blasts of mercury are called ‘bolus doses.’ Although they far exceed ‘safe’ levels, there has never been any research conducted on the toxicity of such bolus doses of mercury given to infants all these years.”

Autism and Mercury.” [Testimony presented by Stephanie Cave, MD before the Committee on Government Reform, US House of Representatives, July 18, 2000. Also presented at the Defeat Autism Now! Conference, 15 Sep 2000, San Diego, CA].

2001 M.A. Fisher et al. publish that adverse events associated with hepatitis B vaccine in U.S. children less than six years of age, 1993 and 1994 and conclude: “Evidence from this study suggests that hepatitis B vaccine is positively associated with adverse health outcomes in the general population of US children.” The hepatitis B vaccine is also associated with prevalent arthritis, acute ear infections, pharyngitis/nasopharyngitis (throat and nasal infections.” (Ann Epidemiol Jan; 11(1):13-21), 2001).

2001 (April) A number of studies have shown a link between the excessive mercury exposure due to vaccines and rising rates of autism in children (a report issued by the California Health and Human Services Agency revealed a 273 percent increase in California children diagnosed with autism in the past decade). One study noted: “A review of medical literature and US government data suggests that (i) many cases of idiopathic autism are induced by early mercury exposure from thimerosal; (ii) this type of autism represents an unrecognized mercurial syndrome; and (iii) genetic and non-genetic factors establish a predisposition whereby thimerosal’s adverse effects occur only in some children.”Bernard, S. et al., Autism: A novel form of mercury poisoning, Med Hypotheses 2001 Apr;56(4):462-71.

2001 (April) National Institutes of Health Statement: Mercury is a potent neurotoxin . . . Infants and young children are also very vulnerable to the impacts of mercury because it can affect their developing brains.” National Institutes of Health April 26, 2001.

2001 (May)An article in the Sunday Times in London on May 27, 2001 observed, “Mercury in vaccines for babies and infants could be the cause of autism in children around the world, according to a growing number of scientists. . .” The National Autistic Society estimates that there are about 500,000 people with autism in Britain, 120,000 of them children. According to one recent study, there has been a tenfold increase [of autism] among children between 1984 and 1994.

2001 Once claimed by AIDS scientists to be a specific component required for “HIV” replication, and a surrogate marker for the presence of “HIV” in cultures, reverse transcriptase or RT is published in market magazines concerning biotechnology stocks having nothing to do with retroviruses (Pachez M. No need to be phased. Shares, 28-32, 2001).

2001 (APRIL) A press release about the National Institutes of Health (NIH) mercury-reduction program (April 26, 2001) noted: “Mercury is a potent neurotoxin. . . . Infants and young children are also very vulnerable to the impacts of mercury because it can affect their developing brains.” And yet we continue to inject bolus doses of mercury directly into tiny infants with many childhood vaccines.

2001 The World Health Organization (WHO) outlines its new global laboratory proposal, aimed at improving the range, speed and quality of influenza virus surveillance (Science 293, 1729; 2001).

2001 FDA recalls Abbott Laboratories HIV p24 Antigen Test Kit lot 71843M101.
” The failure to deliver the Antibody to HIV-1 (Rabbit) component of the test kit to the reaction well could result in a false negative test. The recall notification instructs establishments that currently have in inventory the recalled product to discontinue use and discard the product” (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).

2001 Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System Tables published by the CDC in MMWR show adverse reactions from various vaccines, with the universally mandated hepatitis B vaccine by itself (9,022 cases) topping the list for adverse reactions between 1991-1995, followed by FLU vaccine (4,696 cases). Between 1996-2001, Vericel tops the lists with 9,820 cases, followed by hepatitis B (9,022 cases), followed by FLU vaccine (8,125 cases).

2001 The CDC’s 2001 revised Isolation and Identification of Measles Virus in Culture protocol is analyzed and published by Janine Roberts, in her book ‘Fear of the Invisible. “Monday, 18 August 2008. How ‘Measles Virus’ is isolated for a Vaccine (in 2001).

In an online paper entitled ‘Isolation and Identification of Measles Virus in Cell Culture,’ the CDC, the central Health Research authority of the USA, lays out how isolation of this virus should be done so it can be used, say for a vaccine. It instructs, first obtain from the patient a small sample of urine or fluid from the nose or mouth.”

Next ‘sacrifice’ a marmoset monkey, take some of its cells, then make these cancerous, perhaps by exposing them to radiation, and then give them, on top of this, Epstein-Barr disease! Such extremely sick cells, the CDC informs us, are ‘10,000 times’ more sensitive to the measles virus than are normal human cells.”

Now add to these cells a toxin called trypsin. The CDC tells us to expect some cells to fall off the sides of the vessel as if they have been poisoned. They have been. Now add nutrients and glucose and leave for two or three days so the cells can somewhat recover.”

Now add to the cells the sample gathered from the patient. After an hour, inspect the cells in the culture with a microscope to see if any of the cells are becoming distorted, or are floating free as they did when trypsin was added. If they are, the CDC says this is proof that measles virus is present and making the cells ill.”

This statement made me sit back and think. Why should this illness now be caused by a virus? They had poisoned the cells, made them cancerous….. and now the CDC was saying the cells must be ill because they had measles. Where was the logic in this?”

The next stage involves the addition of two antibiotics, Penicillin and Streptomycin, to the culture and leaving it alone for a day. Again the cells are inspected – and if small holes now appear between cells, it is now presumed that measles virus has caused these. If no sign of such damage, this process is repeated. If after this there are still no signs of damage, then the culture is discarded. However, if 50% or more of the cells are now seriously ill and distorted, the culture is set aside and kept in the fridge as ‘isolated measles virus stock suitable for vaccines!’ All this without actually detecting the virus itself!”

This is the whole process as recommended by the CDC. There is no mention of the need to have a control culture, no mention of any need to isolate the measles virus or even to see it with an electron microscope. The cells are poisoned – and an unseen measles virus is blamed – even the disease the cells have is totally unlike measles. Where is the logic in this?”

2001 Carroll-Pankhurst et al., in her 2001 study published in the British Journal of Cancer report their thirty-five year mortality study on people now in middle age following receipt of SV40-simian-(cancer) virus-contaminated and feces-derived polio vaccine. The study claimed that out of 1073 newborns that were vaccinated and carefully followed for 35 years, (which the authors cautiously claim is not really long enough to determine if the agent causes cancer in humans), and of those infants who were given this “cancer virus-contaminated vaccine ” between 1959 and 1963, there has been no apparent increase in cancer above the expected background incidences in this carefully followed subgroup.. Some scientists, however, such as Michele Carbone, and a group in Australia, that believe SV-40 has caused increases in mesothelioma, brain cancers, leukemias, and other cancers in Humans, but their cohorts have not been studied as long as Pankurst’s (Carrol-Pankhurst et al. British Journal of Cancer, 85 (9), 1205-1207, 2001).

2001 The NucliSens(R) HIV-1 QT assay test kit package insert warns that NucliSens® HIV-1 QT assay “is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV-1 nor is it to be used as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV-1 infection.” NucliSens HIV-1 package insert, Nov. 13, 2001 [a doctor is needed to determine if you are black, hispanic, or gay, and to ask who you slept with in the past].
2001 VAERS data from January 1, 1990 to November 1, 2001 show that:
Following the DTP shot 807 children died.
Following the DTaP shot 364 children died (acellular pertussis was adopted because of high reactions to live cell).
Following the hepatitis B shot 679 children died.
Following the haemophilus B shot 932 children died.
Following the poliovirus live oral vaccine 970 children died.
2001 ( October 17), the law firm of Waters & Kraus revealed a confidential report by the Centers for Disease Control which studied autism as a neurological injury caused by mercury in vaccines. The CDC report stated:“We found increasing risks of neurological developmental disorder.” Disorders noted were:
Developmental Speech Disorder
Autism
Stuttering
Attention Deficit Disorder

The study found a 2.48 times increased risk of autism.Children with mercury exposure were more than twice as likely to develop autism as children not exposed.U.S. law states that: “In a vaccine injury case, a relative risk greater than 2.0 establishes that there is a greater than 50% chance that the injury was caused by the vaccine.” New Yorkers for Vaccination Information and Choice, press release by Waters & Kraus, Dallas, Texas.

Altered Report:A different version was made public and claimed results were inconclusive as to whether the mercury in vaccines has caused a nationwide epidemic of regressive autism and other neurological disorders in small children.
2001 The Infectious Diseases Society of America claimed that “HIV/AIDS” treatment is improving but more patients are dying who have undetectable “viral load” because of “treatment-related toxicities, and……….. end-organ failure in patients with HIV disease” [due to treatment-related toxicities:

Abstract
We analyzed the deaths in an outpatient human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) care clinic at University Hospitals in Cleveland from January 1995 through December 1999. The number of annual deaths decreased progressively, from 112 in 1995 to 32 in 1999. The median final CD4+ cell count before death increased progressively from 10 cells/L in 1995 to 90 cells/L in 1999
.

In the journal, Clinical Infectious Diseases (2001;32:492-497), this emerging clinical phenomenon was stated in the following way:

End-stage liver disease is now the leading cause of death in our hospitalized HIV-seropositive population.”

Translation: Treatments for AIDS are getting better as more patients are dying.

2001 (Feb) FDA recalls P24 antigen test kit (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).

2001 ISIS Report (Instititue for Science In Society)- July 19, 2001-GM AIDS Virus More Deadly:

Researchers have been creating one deadly virus after another in the laboratory, and the latest is ‘SHIV’, a hybrid between the human and monkey AIDS virus containing human interleukin genes that suppress immune response against viruses. At the same time, GM crops engineered with interleukin genes are being grown in open field trials.

2001. NucliSens(R) HIV-test kit package insert was published. 1The NucliSens(R) HIV-1 QT assay is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV-1 nor is it to be used as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV-1 infection [a doctor is needed to determine if you are black, hispanic, or gay, and to ask who you slept with in the past].

2001 (November 9) The CDC publishes revised guidelines for “HIV” counseling, testing, and referral:

When a preliminary, positive rapid test is explained to clients, phrases like “a good chance of being infected” or “very likely infected” can be used to indicate the likelihood of HIV infection and qualified based on the HIV prevalence in the setting and the client’s individual risk.” (CDC: “Revised Guidelines for HIV Counseling, Testing, and Referral” November 9, 2001).

2001 ISIS Report (Institute for Science In Society)-July 29, 2001-AIDS-Vaccine Trials Dangerous

The embattled OECD Conference in Genoa announced a $1.2 billion package to help combat AIDS in the Third World. Vaccine developers and United Nation agencies are pushing for large-scale clinical trials of AIDS vaccines in vulnerable Third World populations ravaged by the AIDS pandemic. AIDS virologists point to evidence that the vaccines are not only ineffective but dangerous. Dr. Mae-Wan Ho reports.

The intended vaccines all contain gp120, a glycoprotein (protein decorated with side-chains of carbohydrates) belonging to the envelope of the human AIDS virus, HIV-1. The candidates include recombinant HIV proteins and peptides (subunit vaccines), HIV-1 or SIV (the monkey AIDS virus), killed or ‘attenuated’, ie, rendered harmless by successive passage in cultured cells, and a wide range of recombinant viral, bacterial and plasmid vectors expressing HIV proteins. HIV researchers Dr. Veljko Veljkovic and his colleagues in Belgrade Yugoslavia, have shown that the gp120, is similar to the part of human immunoglobulin (antibody) proteins (Ig) involved in binding foreign antigens, a crucial step in the immune response. Thus, any AIDS vaccine containing the gp120 glycoprotein or the gene coding for it could strongly interfere with the immune system and make the host more vulnerable to the virus. And in the longer term, it could accelerate disease progression in HIV patients that do not yet have symptoms. But the gp120 gene has other properties that pose an even greater threat to the vaccinated population. It contains ‘recombination hotspots’ similar to those in bacteria and viruses such as Haemophilus influenzae, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, hepatitis B virus and herpes simplex virus, that often co-infect with the HIV, and also similar to recombination elements found in immunoglobulin genes and oncogenes (genes associated with cancer) in the human host. Recombination hotspots are breakpoints at which genetic exchange or recombination occurs much more frequently than usual. Recombination of HIV with bacteria and viruses would generate new pathogens. Within the human host, recombination with human genes would promote chromosomal rearrangements and formation of abnormal immunoglobulins, thus undermining immune responses. HIV-1 sequences integrated into the genome can act as retrotransposons (jumping genes) that can mutate genes by jumping into them, and some of the mutations may trigger cancer [1].”


“Dr. Veljkovic’s team, in collaboration with researchers in UK, Italy and US, already found evidence of recombination between gp120 and a gene from Haemophilus influenzae [2]. Recombination between an HIV gene and Mycoplasm fermentans has been implicated in ‘Gulf war syndrome’ [3] affecting a high proportion of soldiers from United States and the United Kingdoom who served in the Gulf war. A new subtype of HIV-1 may also have resulted from recombination between HIV- 1 and SIV [4].”


“The proponents of the AIDS vaccination trials argue that the desperate situation precipitated by the AIDS epidemic justifies acceptance of the ‘small risks’ involved. But Veljkovic and his colleagues have written a monograph documenting the lack of efficacy of the vaccines and the enormous risks involved [5].”

Not effective and dangerous”

In 1994, the AIDS Research Advisory Committee of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommended that phase III clinical trials of gp120 vaccines should not be conducted ‘at this time and in this country’. The reasons, according to Dr. A. Fauci, director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), were that the vaccines were ineffective; and there was a remote chance that the vaccines would compromise the immune system and make the recipient more vulnerable to infection [6]. The possibility that a vaccinated individual runs a greater risk of developing an established infection, or of progressing to disease more rapidly once infected, was confirmed subsequently [7]. The recombinant gp120 subunit vaccine tested in HIV-negative individuals was ineffective in protecting them against infection. Those who became infected during or after vaccination actually had in their blood sera significant levels of antibodies against the vaccine before they became infected, but those antibodies failed to protect them from infection. On the contrary, the vaccine appeared to have acted as a decoy to fool the immune system into mounting an attack on it, while allowing the HIV itself to slip through the host defence to get established. This subunit vaccine is due to go on Phase III clinical trial in Thailand.”

Vaccine trials in breach of UNAIDS ethical, scientific and safety standards”

According to the WHO report 2000, more than 90% of all AIDS cases are in developing countries. UNAIDS and NIH are the two most important organizations involved in developing AIDS vaccines. UNAIDS Executive Director Peter Piot has declared, ‘It is our collective responsibility to ensure that all vaccine trials are conducted under the strictest possible ethical and scientific standards.’ But Dr. Veljkovic has shown that current vaccines based on HIV-1 gp120 can harm the immune system of individuals and, on account of its recombinogenic tendencies, has the potential to generate deadly viruses and bacteria that can spread through the vaccinated populations and to wild life. The intended vaccine trials are in serious breach of ethical, scientific and safety standards.”
“AIDS, more so than other diseases, cannot be addressed simply by vaccinations, even if efficacious and safe vaccines could be found. More than drugs and vaccines, we need to end poverty, malnutrition and environmental destruction, to reinstate social equity and free access to primary healthcare and education.” (See Superviruses and Superbugs from AIDS vaccines, ISIS News 9/10 ISSN1474-1547(print), ISSN1474-1814 (online).

1 Prljic J, Veljkovic N, Doliana T, Colombatti A, Johnson E, Metlas R. and Veljkovic V. Identificaion of an active Chi recombinational hot spot within the HIV-1 envelope gene: consequences for develop-ment of AIDS vaccine. Vaccine 1999: 17: 1462-7.
2. Nicolson GL, Nicolosn NL and Nasralla Mycoplasmal infections and fibromyalgia/ chronic fatigue illness (Gulf War Illness) associated with deployment to operation Desert Storm. Int. J. Med. 1998: 1: 80-92.
3.Simo F, Mauclere P, Roques P, Muler-Trutwin MC, Saragosti S, Georges- Courbot MC, Barre-sinoussi F and Brun-Verzinet F. Identification of a new human immunodeficiency virus type I distinct from group M and group O. Nature Med. 1998: 4: 1032-7.
4.Veljkovic V et al Chapter 7. Safety and ethical considerations of AIDS vaccines (courtesy of Dr. Veljkovic). The HIV vaccine paradox;. Science 1994, 15, 475.
5.Locher CP, Grant RM, Wrin T. et al. Antibody and cellular immune responses in breakthrough infection subject after HIV type 1 glycoprotein 120 vaccination. AIDS Res Human Retovir 1999, 71, 1685.
6. Gold D. IAVI launches project to develop oral HIV vaccine. IAVI Report, April-June 2000.
7. Caley IJ, Betts MR, Irlbeck DM. Et al. Humoral, mucocal, and cellular immunity in response to a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 immunogen expressed by a Venezuelan equine encepphalitis virus vaccine vector. J. Virol. 1997, 71, 3031

2002 (January 17) MANY CASES OF NO “HIV” TRANSMISSION AMONG SERODISCORDANT COUPLES, AND OTHER TEST KIT RECALLS.

The Journal of Infectious Disease feartured an article about 17 women who remained ”HIV” uninfected, despite a history of heavy exposure to HIV through repeated, unprotected sexual contact with an infected partner, and 12 of their regular, male HIV-positive partners.

2002 (February) “Merck Says Tens of Thousands May Need Another Hepatitis A Shot,” Merck & Company said on Friday that an unknown number of people in as many as 27 nations, including 60 000 youngsters in Brazil, might need new shots to prevent infection with the hepatitis A virus because vaccines they received might have been defective.

2002 (February) Alarm bells are again sounded when the avian virus “H5N1” infects two people in Hong Kong, one fatal.

2002 The FDA recalled BioRad Genetic systems HIV Types 1 &2 Synthetic Peptide containing test kits (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).

2002 It was reported in The Journal of Virology, that saquinovir and other protease inhibitors are severely toxic to T-cells in the absence of “HIV” infection.

2002 (May 1) ISIS Report —Doubts Deepen over Safety of AIDS Vaccines

Another key AIDS vaccine is abandoned before phase III trial. This latest setback comes at the end of a string of failures in developing vaccines that may be worse than useless.” Dr. Mae-Wan Ho reports.

The US government abandoned a controversial AIDS vaccine trial and announced it will combine the work of two federal institutions, the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Defence. Both institutions had proposed trials to test a combination of similar vaccines – a dose of canarypox virus engineered to carry HIV-1 proteins with a booster shot of the HIV protein gp120. The trial was designed to compare the types of immune responses the vaccine evoked with the protection it provided. That required the vaccine to produce an immune response in at least 30 per cent of volunteers. But analysis of the data suggests the response did not come up to scratch. “It didn’t even come very close,” said Anthony Fauci, director of the NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The cancelled NIH trial, which would have involved 11,000 volunteers, was anticipated to cost $60 to $80 million dollars. The Department of Defence trial, which was designed to test only the efficacy of the vaccine, will still go ahead. But that may be a grave mistake.”

“Some virologists have been warning for years that the entire class of AIDS vaccines based on the HIV gp120 gene or protein is not only ineffective, but also dangerous for the recipients and the human populations. There is evidence suggesting that gp120 can interfere with and undermine the immune system and can readily recombine with viruses and bacteria (used as vectors) to generate new pathogens.”


“The envelope glycoprotein, gp120 of HIV-1, is similar to the region of human immunoglobulins that binds antigen, a crucial feature of the immune response. Thus, any AIDS vaccine containing the gp120 could interfere with the immune system and make people more vulnerable to the virus. And in the long term, it could accelerate disease progression in HIV patients that do not yet have symptoms.”


“Recombinant viruses expressing gp120 could also be a source of potential new pathogens… Furthermore, HIV-1 sequences integrated into the genome have the potential to initiate a wide variety of diverse genetic effects caused by all mobile genetic elements, especially mutations of genes due to random insertion, some of which might trigger cancer.”…”A recent theoretical study adds further fuel to their warning. Partially effective vaccines that inhibit the growth of the pathogen, such as the AIDS vaccines described here may leave death rates unchanged, or worse, increase deaths with the level of vaccination”… (see “Health warning over partially effective vaccines”, this issue). “But a company in Texas, Prodigene, is putting gp120 into GM maize as a cheap, edible oral vaccine against HIV as announced in the internet journal, AIDScience. This will surely lead to widespread contamination of our food crops with disastrous consequences. Not only is this extremely hazardous for human beings. It will affect all organisms in the food chain and multiply the opportunities for this gene to recombine with bacteria and viruses in the environment, of which 99% cannot be cultured and are hence completely unknown. An edited version of our response was published in the internet journal http://www.aidscience.com”.

2002 Pediarix (penta-valent DtaP/HepB/IPV) licensed (against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), hepatitis B, and polio, all in 1 vaccine.

2002 Midwest Nurse Week, Vol. 3, No. 2; March/April 2002, p.27. “Nursing Home Residents Get Flu Despite Flu Shot. A flu outbreak in Nebraska’s urban area killed one nursing home resident. Nearly all of the residents received flu shots. A similar outbreak at the Grand Island Veterans Home occurred although 98% of the residents were given flu shot.

2002 (May 16) FDA recalls Berna Biotech’s Typhoid Vaccine Live Oral Ty21a lot numbers 16044.1a 16044.1b.” The product may lose potency before the expiration date, even when kept at labeled refrigerated temperatures” (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).

2002 (June) Mercury Horse Drug Recalled by The FDA.“Drug contains mercury: poisonous to horses and people. Purchasers should not use it. Contact local waste-management authorities to learn how to destroy it without endangering animals, people, or waterways.” The Salt Lake Tribune, June 1, 2002

2002 Figures from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed there were 1,920 confirmed cases of polio reported by laboratories in 2002, up from 483 the previous year.

2002 (August) Shares crashed after the British drug maker PowderJect Pharmaceuticals said it was recalling its BCG tuberculosis vaccine in the UK. PowderJect said the move would reduce full-year pre-tax profits by about 5 million Pounds from previous estimates of about 25 million. The withdrawal followed the recent temporary suspension of its license in Ireland when the Irish Medicines Board found that some batches of the drug did not remain potent. Accusations of cronyism blew-up earlier this year after it emerged the company was awarded a 32 million government contract to supply smallpox vaccine, in case of a terrorist germ warfare attack.

2002 (August 7) FDA recalls Bio-Rad Laboratories Genetic Systems HIV1/HIV-2 Peptide EIA lot 105VP1. ” The recalled test kits are qualitative enzyme immunoassays for the detection of antibodies to HIV-1 and/or HIV-2 in human serum and plasma, and also in cadaveric serum specimens. Microwell plates in this lot that are performing outside of expected performance ranges as indicated by invalid (low) HIV-1 and HIV-2 Positive Controls and elevated Negative Control values” (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).

2002 British Medical Journal publishes article showing that: “Children vaccinated in infancy are at increased risk of hepatitis B virus infection in the late teens” (Hilton Whittle, Shabbar Jaffar, Michael Wansbrough, Maimuna Mendy, Uga Dumpis, Andrew Collison, Andrew Hall. Observational study of vaccine efficacy 14 years after trial of hepatitis B vaccination in Gambian children. (BMJ vol 325, 14 September, 2002).

2002 (Oct. 18) FDA recalls Aventis Pasteur’s Meningococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine, Groups A, C, Y, W-135 Combined, single-dose vials (including single-dose in five dose packaging) lot numbers UB040AA, UB040AB, UB070AA, UB096AA.

2002 GSK pulled Lymerix (lyme disease vaccine) off the market.

2002 The tuberculosis vaccine has been shown to have no efficacy against adult TB; the U.S. doesn’t vaccinate and in 1999 had 6.4 tuberculosis cases per 100,000. Russia vaccinates for TB but its rate of infection was 85 cases per 100,000. Today it is even higher, states the author of Timebomb: The Global Epidemic of Multi-Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis. Lee B. Reichman, M.D., M.P.H., with Janice Hopkins Tanne, McGraw-Hill, 2002.

2003 Inhaled flu vaccine (Flumist) being reviewed for approval by the FDA.

2003 (January 6) FDA recalls Abbott Laboratories HCV EIA 2.0 Test Kit lot 92527M101 (4/15/2003). “The manufacturer found an increase in frequency of Negative Control Out of Range High values, which results in an increased likelihood of invalid assay runs… Establishments that have the recalled product in inventory are instructed to discontinue use and destroy any remaining product,” (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).

2003 (February 17) FDA recalls antibody to Human Immunodeficiency Virus (Abbott HIVAG-1 Monoclonal EIA Test Kit lot numbers): 92677M200, 92677M201, 92677M202, 95132M100, 95132M101 (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).

“The manufacturer found an increase in the initial reactive rate when compared to historical performance expectations as shown in the package insert. This may result in an increased likelihood of invalid assay runs. Specificity, as defined by repeat reactive rate, and sensitivity continue to meet all performance requirements. Establishments that have the recalled product in inventory are instructed to discontinue use and destroy any remaining product.”

2003 (February 28) Outbreaks of “chicken flu” occur in The Netherlands due to the “H7N7” avian flu virus. By April the so-called virus has spread to nearly 800 poultry farms and resulted in the culling of almost 11 million chickens. The so-called imagined virus infects 83 people causing conjunctivitis and flu-like symptoms, and kills one man. The drug Tamiflu is said to protect people against further spread of the virus.

2003 (March 19) FDA recalls Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics Ortho HCV (Hepatitis C virus) Version 3.0 ELISA Test System, lot number TXE358; Ortho Antibody to HBsAg ELISA Test System 2, lot number 2HB567;Ortho HBc ELISA Test System, lot numbers CHK423 and CHK424. ” OPD Tablets that are packaged as components of Ortho ELISA Test Systems after receiving information that the OPD tablets may be discolored… if yellow or discolored OPD tablets are inadvertently used, the assay controls may be out of the acceptable range criteria as stated in the package insert resulting in an invalid plate.” Patients who were diagnosed positive with these recalled tests are never informed.

2003 (May) Nature publishes statement that cows could foster flu pandemics.
423, 5 (01 May 2003) doi:10.1038/423005b.

2003 Smallpox vaccine is mass produced for first-responders recommended following the events of 9/11, 2001 “terrorist attacks” during the second year of the G.W.Bush Administration..

2003 Cobra warns that “AmpliScreen HIV-1 Test is not intended for use as an aid in diagnosis” (COBAS AmpliScreen HIV-1 Test, version 1.5 Approval Date: 12/19/2003) [a doctor is needed to determine if you are black, hispanic, or gay, and to ask who you slept with in the past].

2003 Weeks after the announcement that the “HIV” vaccine, AIDSVAX, had failed, VaxGen (the makers of AIDSVAX) was hit with a shareholder lawsuit that accused the company’s officials of continuing to make positive statements about their vaccine to artificially pump up the company’s stock price, despite mounting evidence that it was not effective. The suit was dismissed last year and VaxGen, under new management, remade itself into a biodefense company, and is now supported with 887 million of our tax dollars.

BECAUSE THE U.S. VACCINE PROGRAMMES COULDN’T MAKE ANTHRAX VACCINE AS WELL AS PASTEUR COULD MORE THAN 100 YEARS EARLIER WITH HIS TWO HELPERS, GEORGE BUSH THREATENED CANADA NOT TO BUST BAYER’S PATENT RIGHTS ON CIPRO DURING THE EVENTS SURROUNDING 9/11:

2003 “In the wake of anthrax being placed in the US mail following the events of 9/11, 2001 G.W. Bush “terrorist attacks,” the anthrax vaccine used in Desert Storm is found to be non-protective in animal experiments, and despite extensive domestic support for suspending Bayer’s patent on Cipro, Tommy Thompson acting in behalf of the Bush Administration said it is “illegal” to suspend Bayer’s patent on Cipro. Instead he entered into negotiations with Bayer with the intention of lowering the price of Cipro. Facing an unprecedented public embarrassment, Bayer agreed to lower the price of Cipro for government purchase from $1.77 to $0.95.

The Bush administration did not suspend the patent of Bayer largely because it was more concerned with the wider implications of such an action, particularly on the ongoing negotiations at the WTO. Realizing that scrapping Bayer’s patent would set a precedent that could give legitimacy to the growing demands of the poor and developing world for more flexibility on patent issues, the US sent a clear message to the world that patents are more important than public health. Such a calculated move was not only meant to serve the corporate interests of drug manufacturers, but also to convey the message to the developing nations that the US administration would continue its discriminatory policy on the issue of patents.”

2003 (December) South Korea has its first outbreak of avian flu in chickens, caused by “H5N1.”

2003 (December 7) WHY YOU SHOULD AVOID TAKING VACCINES is published by Dr. James Howenstine, MD.
“Dr. James R. Shannon, former director of the National institute of health declared,”the only safe vaccine is one that is never used.” Cowpox vaccine was believed able to immunize people against smallpox. At the time this vaccine was introduced, there was already a decline in the number of cases of smallpox. Japan introduced compulsory vaccination in 1872. In 1892 there were 165,774 cases of smallpox with 29,979 deaths despite the vaccination program.”

Much of the success attributed to vaccination programs may actually have been due to improvement in public health related to water quality and sanitation, less crowded living conditions, better nutrition, and higher standards of living.”
“Typically the incidence of a disease was clearly declining before the vaccine for that disease was introduced. In England the incidence of polio had decreased by 82 % before the polio vaccine was introduced in 1956.”

In the early 1900s an astute Indiana physician, Dr. W.B. Clarke, stated “Cancer was practically unknown until compulsory vaccination with cowpox vaccine began to be introduced. I have had to deal with two hundred cases of cancer, and I never saw a case of cancer in an unvaccinated[1] person.”

There is a widely held belief that vaccines should not be criticized because the public might refuse to take them. This is valid only if the benefits exceed the known risks of the vaccines.”

Do Vaccines Actually Prevent Disease?
“This important question does not appear to have ever been adequately studied. Vaccines are enormously profitable for drug companies and recent legislation in the U.S. has exempted lawsuits against pharmaceutical firms in the event of adverse reactions to vaccines which are very common. In 1975 Germany stopped requiring pertussis (whooping cough) vaccination. Today less than 10% of German children are vaccinated against pertussis. The number of cases of pertussis has steadily decreased[2] even though far fewer children are receiving pertussis vaccine.”

(Please see Dr. Howenstine’s entire article on this website in the section entitled, Critical Analysis of an FDA Document Regarding the Safety and Efficacy of Vaccines).

Footnotes and references for Howinstein’s article:
1 Mullins Eustace Murder by Injection pg 132 The National Council for Medical research, P. O. Box
1105, Staunton, Virginia 24401
2 Gary Null Interview with Dr. Dean Black April 7, 1995
2003 (January) Lymph node fibrosis impedes peripheral [CD4.sup.+] T-cell count; fibrosis could be better predictor of ability to recover after HAART. (The Scientist | January 27, 2003 | Roberts, Josh P).

2003 (17th June) Mye-Wan HO ISIS AIDS Vaccines Worse Than Useless?
“The US administration is offering AIDS-ravaged nations support for fighting AIDS tied to the purchase of GM products. The main anti-AIDS strategy is a class of vaccines that carries its own risks. Prominent AIDS researchers have called repeatedly for a moratorium as evidence of hazards accumulates. “Dr. Mae-Wan Ho reports.

George Bush has taken Europe to the World Trade Organisation over Europe’s de facto moratorium on GM imports. In the week of the G8 summit in Evian, France, Bush blasted Europe for perpetuating starvation in Africa by blocking US food aid with anti-GM policies, and announced his pledge of $15bn to combat AIDS globally, especially in Africa.”

“The only AIDS vaccine to have progressed past phase 3 trial, made by VaxGen, took 5 years and involved 5108 gay men and 309 women. Unfortunately, it proved ineffective, and may even be harmful.”

“A few days after Bush announced the AIDS package, US Congress was denounced for tying support for anti-AIDS research programmes in 50 countries to their acceptance of GM products.”
“The gp120 protein is strongly immunogenic, which is why it is widely used in vaccines, in the hope that the body will produce antibodies against the protein and hence protect against the virus. But there have been many worrying signs that this may have just the opposite effect.

“A recombinant gp120 vaccine tested in HIV-negative individuals in phaseI/II trails, was not effective in protecting against the disease. Not only that, participants in the trials had significant levels of circulating antibodies against the vaccine before they became infected, and came down with AIDS disease.”
“The vaccine could also be dangerous. A vaccine based on the gp120 from the strain SF2, actually suppressed the production of antibodies that could neutralise the later infecting virus, while boosting the production of useless antibodies that were specific for the vaccine strain, SF2. In other words, gp120 acts as a molecular decoy to disarm the body’s antiviral response, leaving it more vulnerable, and increasing the likelihood of rapid disease progression in those vaccinated that later became infected. This phenomenon is called “deceptive imprinting” of the immune system.”

“Veljkovic and his colleagues have repeated their call for an immediate moratorium on the current clinical trials of HIV-1 gp120/160 vaccines.”

2003 (December) “At Kenyatta National Hospital [Kenya] …out of 31 couples tested, 23 were discordant [one positive, one negative]. It was reported that some of them stayed in a sexual relationship with the infected partner for more than six years without the infected one passing the virus to the other. And when these discordant couples brought their children for testing, all of them were free of the virus…” (Horizon Magazine, December 18, 2003).

2003 December 19 COBAS AmpliScreen HIV-1 Test package insert, version 1.5 was published (http://www.fda.gov/cber/label/hiv1roc121903LB.pdf): “This test is not intended for use as an aid in diagnosis.” [a doctor is needed to determine if you are black, hispanic, or gay, and to ask who you slept with in the past].

2004 FDA recalls bioMerieux NucliSens automated isolation reagent(s),DiaSoran’s HIV-1 – HIV-2 Plus O EIA Testing Software, and Roche’s Amplicor HIV Monitor test (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).
2004 It was reported in The New England Journal of Medicine that vitamin supplements can ward off progression to AIDS in the absence of HAART (Highly Active Anti-Retroviral Therapy).
2004 Announcement of the failure of the 120 million dollar AIDSVAX program:
“A sound Rationale (is) needed for Phase III HIV vaccine trials.”
“The decision about whether or not to proceed with mounting a phase III HIV-1 vaccine trial needs to take into account the likelihood of success and the consequences of failure, the value of what can realistically be learned, the human and financial costs involved. As a whole, the scientific community must do a better job of bringing truly promising vaccine candidates to this stage of development and beyond.” (Gallo and others, Science, Vol 303 16 January, 2004).

2004 (January) Japan is claimed to have the first outbreak of avian influenza “H5N1” since 1925, but it isn’t clear who sequenced the “H5N1” strain found in frozen snow samples from 1925).

2004 (January) WHO confirms “H5N1 infection” in 11 people, eight fatal, in Thailand and Vietnam, but no cases of person to person transmission. The virus has wreaked havoc among poultry in Thailand, Vietnam, Japan and South Korea, and has also appeared in a duck farm in China. WHO is developing vaccine candidates using “H5N1” viruses isolated in 2003 and 2004, at laboratories in the U.S. and U.K. publishes that reverse genetics could offer forward-thinking flu vaccine (23 Jan 2004) doi:10.1038/news040119-15.

2004 (February) United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization advises governments in affected areas that mass culling of birds is failing to halt the disease and that vaccination of targeted poultry flocks is required as well.

2004 (February) West Africa polio campaign is boycotted by Nigerian states. A mass poliomyelitis vaccination campaign got under way to immunize 63 million children across west Africa but was boycotted by four predominantly Muslim states in Nigeria, where leaders claim the oral vaccine causes sterility and spreads AIDS BMJ (328:485 2004). The West African campaign was intended as a final push to stamp out the disease in the region and is part of the World Health Organization’s 15-year drive to halt transmission of the poliomyelitis virus across the world by 2005. According to Dr Haruna Kaita, the head of the medical team that conducted the test in India, the vaccines contain “undeclared contaminants that can cause malfunctioning of the testes and cause infertility in women.” The team also found “some toxic substances.”

“Polio controversy started long ago,” said Dr Kaita. “If you find one batch defective, you should condemn all batches. What these people [proponents of the vaccine] are saying is unethical, illegal, and criminal, and they know that these things are contaminated and they have the potential to cause human hazards. They should be banned rather than cause diseases in innocent children.”

2004 (March) Avian “H5N1″ flu “virus” is said to become more widespread among bird flocks in Asia, and is said to have caused 34 human cases, with 23 deaths. Nature reports that in a race to make a bird-flu vaccine, race for a vaccine, that scientists are using reverse genetics to design new prototype vaccines against bird flu and establishing facilities for their mass production, including new cell culture as well as traditional egg-based methods. Biotechnology 22, 267 (01 Mar 2004) doi:10.1038/nbt0304-267a. Nature reports that the race for pandemic flu vaccine rife with hurdles 432, 261 (18 Nov 2004) doi:10.1038/432261a.

2004 (April) Avian influenza virus “H7N3” confirmed in two poultry workers in British Columbia who developed flu-like symptoms.

2004 (June) Tests on chickens and mice show that avian flu “H5N1″ virus isolated from ducks in 2004 is more virulent and harmful to mammals than in recent years.

2004 (July) Several countries, including Thailand, Vietnam, China and Indonesia, report new infections in poultry with “H5N1.”

2004 (August) “H5N1” virus is reported to have killed an additional three people in Vietnam.

2004 Nearly two dozen prominent AIDS researchers write an opinion piece in the journal Science in early 2004 calling Donald Francis’s AIDSVAX vaccine completely incapable of preventing or ameliorating HIV infection and questioning the wisdom of the U.S. government’s sponsoring the Thailand trial. “There are adverse consequences to conducting large-scale trials of inadequate [HIV] vaccines. . . . One price for repetitive failure could be crucial erosion of confidence by the public and politicians in our capability of developing an effective AIDS vaccine.”

2004 (April 2) FDA recalls Aventis Pasteur’s Imovax rabies vaccine lots:
X0667-2, X0667-3, W1419-2, W1419-3. “Precautionary measure stemming from the discovery through routine testing of a non-inactivated production strain of virus in a single product lot, which was not distributed.”

2004 (May 13) FDA recalls DiaSorin’s HIV-1 / HIV-2 Plus O EIA Testing Software.
” An error was contained on the ETI-LAB Applications disk for programming the BioRad HIV-1/HIV-2 Plus O assay. The error induced specimen and conjugate incubation temperatures for the assay to remain at ambient temperature rather than the required 37°C temperature;” (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).

2004 (May 17) FDA recalls bioMerieux (Durham, NC) NucliSens HIV QT.
” Some irregularities have been observed with one lot’s guanidine isothiocyanate (GuSCN) component, which may affect the sensitivity and accuracy of assays” (but patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed).

2004 (June 24) FDA recalls Roche’s Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor Test, v 1.5.
” Roche has confirmed increased frequency of occurrence of “blue foci” with the Avidin-Horseradish Peroxidase (AV-HRP) Conjugate Lot E09659. Increased frequency of the occurrence of “blue foci” may lead to elevated and/or observed out of sequence optical density readings in the microwell plate assays that have used this particular lot of reagent.” Patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed.

2004 The Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) retreats from the stated 1999 goal of the AAP and the PHS to remove thimerosal from U.S. vaccines … “Despite its removal from many childhood vaccines, thimerosal is still routinely added to some formulations of influenza vaccine administered to U.S. infants, as well as to several other vaccines” (e.g. tetanus-diphtheria and monovalent tetanus) administered to older children and adults.

2004 (November) WHO warns that the “H5N1” bird flu virus might spark a flu pandemic that could kill millions of people, and is concerned that “much of the world is unprepared for a pandemic” and needs to enhance preparedness to reduce its potential impact. WHO officials meet with vaccine makers, public-health experts and government representatives in a bid to speed up the production of flu vaccines to avert a global pandemic.

2004 (December) WHO reports the first human case of “H5N1” in Vietnam since early September. Sequencing of the chicken-genome (published in Nature 9 December 2004) may help provide insight into which genes prevent the spread of bird flu from person to person. Since the beginning of 2004, bird flu has caused the deaths of 32 people in Vietnam and Thailand, and millions of chickens across Asia due to culling. Normal flu is said to kill 30,000 Americans/year but the more conservative estimate is about 11,000/year U.S., as opposed to 32 in two countries.

2004 “HIV” and “HBV” sequences found present in normal human genome analyses: McClure MA, Richardson HS, Clinton RA, Hepp CM, Crowther BA, Donaldson EF. Automated characterization of potentially active retroid agents in the human genome. Genomics. Apr;85(4):512-23, 2005).

2004 The American Red Cross reported that even after repeated “HIV” testing using different test kit types, that “low-risk” populations, such as blood donors (or military recruits or nuns) will typically yield 12 (PCR) positive or 2 (ELISA) positive results out of 37,000,000 million units of blood, which means that 10 out of 12 were false positives. In a follow-up analysis of this Red Cross study, it was then claimed that 6 of the 12 PCR-positive subjects tests seroconverted within several months, thereby obtaining a “HIV” molecular signature in 8/12 cases, out of 37 million negatives. Again, these numbers could represent statistical artifact, or, the several who seroconverted may represent the detection of some kind of auto-immune condition in those who test positive, like psoriasis, arthritis, warts, or physiological stress, or a genetic polymorphism.

2005 (January 18) FDA recalls GEN-Probe Inc Procleix HIV-1/HCV Assay. ” Procleix HIV-1 / HCV Assay, Master Lot 401254, was found to contain an elevated level of copper. The source of the elevated copper was the raw material, Trehalose, which is also a component of the Enzyme Reagent. The increase in copper may affect kit performance.” Patients who were diagnosed positive with it are never informed.

2005 (January) Chinese authorities announce they have developed a new rapid test for bird flu that produces results in hours rather than days.

2005 (February 4) FDA recalls Globus Media Inc. Rapid HIV Test Kits. “Rapid HIV Test Kits, marketed nationwide via the Internet, by Globus Media, were not reviewed for safety and effectiveness as required under U.S. law. Consequently, there is no assurance that the results from these kits are reliable. DO NOT RELY ON ANY TEST RESULT FROM THESE RECALLED KITS. Consumers who have these products should not use them. Consumers who have used the RAPID HIV Test Kit, should consult a health care professional immediately to confirm any results.” Patients who were diagnosed positive with them are never informed.

2005 (February 24) New bird flu symptoms reported and the B.C. Centre for Disease Control is warning doctors to look out for new symptoms related to “the deadly” avian flu outbreak in Southeast Asia. At least two children in Vietnam who died of bird flu had diarrhea and seizures rather than classic respiratory symptoms. In the Feb. 17 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers from the Oxford University Clinical Research Unit in Ho Chi Minh City said two children died in February 2004 of acute encephalitis that was caused by the “H5N1” type of bird flu. Lab tests showed the “H5N1” virus in the children’s feces, raising fears that the virus could be passed from person to person. Dr. Aleina Tweed, an epidemiologist, said doctors in British Columbia are being told to watch for gastrointestinal problems, especially in children, when they see sick people who have recently travelled in Southeast Asia. “We wanted to make sure that the medical health community was aware that there are different presentations of this, not to be looking only for respiratory illness among people who have recently traveled to this area,” Tweed said. Late last year, doctors in B.C. were put on high alert to watch for signs of avian flu in people coming back from Southeast Asia. World Health Organization experts believe the “H5N1” flu strain poses the single greatest threat of a pandemic in humans. “What I’m questioning is this escalating rhetoric, led by the World Health Organization, that’s trying to tell us that in fact we are on the verge of a pandemic,” Dr. Richard Schabas told CBC Radio’s The Current. “I don’t think we really know what it is that triggers a pandemic, what it is that causes a particular virus to transform itself,” added Schabas, Ontario’s former chief medical officer of health. Tweed said while it is troubling to hear reports of new symptoms, a bird flu pandemic is not possible unless the virus spreads easily from one person to another. There is very little information now about that risk. In Asia, it is more common to get “H5N1″ directly from poultry, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.”We certainly concur with the WHO that this is a very serious threat. Whether it is a threat that will manifest itself, there’s no way to know, until it actually happens,” Tweed said.” Whether it will happen this week, this month or never, we simply can’t predict,” she said. “But we wouldn’t want to take the chance, and not be as prepared as we can.” The federal government acknowledged the threat in Wednesday’s budget. A Vancouver-based company will receive about $20 million to develop a bird flu vaccine. “Symptoms of bird flu are said to consist of a fever, shortness of breath and a cough. Five patients there was a history of sputum production, and in three of these patients, the sputum was blood-stained. Two patients reported pleuritic pain. Diarhea was reported in seven of the patients. Bleeding from the nose and gums was noted in one patient on the forth day of illness. No patient had a sore throat, conjunctivitis, rash, or a runny nose. Physical examination in nine patients revealed fever, rapid respiratory rate (median 55 breaths per minute; range 28-70), respiratory distress, and crackles on examination of the chest.” http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2005/02/24/avian-flu050224.html

2005 Jan/Feb -13 additional cases of bird flu have occurred in Vietnam since December 2004, 12 fatal. [Typically, in the U.S. There are approximately 30 thousand influenza deaths during the same interval. Some Global pandamic!

2005 (February) First report of a bird flu case from Cambodia. A report of probable person to person transmission of bird flu in Vietnam is published (New Engl. J. Med, 352 333–340). WHO has made prototype “H5N1” vaccine strains available to a number of institutions and companies and several vaccines have been developed for clinical testing. 15 additional cases of “H5N1” infection in Vietnam, and one additional case inCambodia, are reported. Bird flu has spread to 10 countries, including Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and killed around 50 million chickens.

2005 Evidence that vaccine adjuvants like squalene (MF-59), when they have been added to certain lots of anthrax (and perhaps “HIV”) vaccines given to soldiers on threat of court martial if they don’t roll up their shirt on command, have induced autoimmune syndromes in almost 100% of every sick Gulf-War I veteran tested, and have evoked antibodies to squalene in their blood (Gary Matsumoto. Vaccine A, Basic Books Publisher, 2005). Squalene and other adjuvants have been used by scientists for many years to induce rodents to develop arthritis, macrophagic myofasciitis, mutliple-sclerosis (demyelinating syndromes), and lupus (Holmdahl et al. Arthritis induced in rats with nonimmunogenic adjuvants as models for rheumatoid arthritis Immunol Rev. Dec;184:184-202, 2001; Gherardi NK. Lessons from macrophagic myofasciitis: towards definition of a vaccine adjuvant-related syndrome. Rev Neurol (Paris). Feb;159(2):162-4), 2003).

2005 An “encephalitis vaccine” mandated by the CDC for collage-age (young adults) withdrawn for safety reasons (see FDA’s 2005 recall list). Also see CDC’s MMWR. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5541a2.htm

2005 Merck claims that its Human papilloma vaccine: “was 100 percent effective in preventing precancerous cervical disease, but only when given to women and girls who had never engaged in sex at the time of the shots,” yet, “documents prepared by the FDA suggest some women with persistent HPV infections could be at higher risk of cervical cancer after taking the vaccine.”

Dr. Schiffman heads the HPV Troup in the Division of Cancer, Epidemiology,and Genetics at NCI and is a tenured senior investigator. In mid March,Dr. Mark Schiffman, MD, MPH, called CAP TODAY’s editor to voice a troubling concern: that laboratories are failing to clinically validate their HPV tests” (September 2005 issue of Pathology/Laboratory Medicine/ and Laboratory Management article released monthly by The Collage ofAmerican Pathologists-CAP).

“What surprises me is that this {the certainty with which these tests for HPV and cervcal cancer} could in any way be controversial, he says. “The issue is not so much controversial, of course, as it is loaded-with money and competitive claims, scientific complexity, and grave medical concerns” (Dr. Schiffman).

In the same article, Even Attila Lorincz, PhD, chief scientific officer and senior VP of research development at Digene (one of the HPV test-kit makers) says that “much of the confusion simply boils down to analytical and clinical accuracy is not well enough understood or described by people who write or talk about it,” and that “the problem surfaces in the HPV literature with distressing regularity.”

2005 (April)Vietnam has reported a total of 60 laboratory confirmed human cases of “H5N1” avian influenza since the outbreaks began, with 35 deaths; Thailand has confirmed a total of 17 infections of which 12 have been fatal, while Cambodia has confirmed two fatal cases. Same issue as stated above: 30,000/year with regular influenzas.

2005 (May) Rumour of human deaths in China from “H5N1” remain unconfirmed, while the virus has killed more than 1000 migratory birds. Indonesia’s governmentconfirms reports of “H5N1” infection in pigs.

2005 (May) WHO reports 97 cases and 53 deaths from bird flu in Vietnam, Cambodia and Thailand since January 2004. news@nature.com publishes that heightened security after flu scare sparks biosafety debate (11 May 2005) doi:10.1038/435131a

Note: There are over 30,000 deaths reported in the U.S./year due to “influenza” (although the accurate number is thought to be around 2-4,000/yr). Yet 53 deaths from “bird flu,” spread over 3 countries, is now considered a pandemic, if indeed these 53 cases were flu at all and not due to doctor-prescribed “remedies,” such as pharmaceutical drugs like tamiflu. The published case studies show this is indeed the case. These 53 deaths were due to doctors, not flu.

2005 (June) Indonesia confirms a man exposed to sick chickens has been infected with a deadly strain of avian flu virus. The farm labourer shows no symptoms, but his blood carries antibodies to the “H5N1” strain. Bird flu becomes resistant to the low-cost amantadine family of antiviral drugs. Chinese farmers’ use of the compound in chickens is blamed, a claim formally denied by Chinese authorities who pledge to investigate the claim.

2005 (July) At the end of a three-day conference in Malaysia, World Health Organization officials announce that $150 million is needed to fight the spread of the disease in people and another $100 million to stop its spread in animals in Asia. The Philippines, so far the only Asian country unaffected by bird flu, report their first case in a town north of the capital, Manila, but do not confirm whether it is the “H5N1” strain. On 29 July, the World Health Organisation confirms that samples from an 8-year-old girl who died on the 14 July, two days after the death of her father, who was Indonesia’s first confirmed human infection of influenza A (“H5N1”).

2005 (August) The World Health Organisation (WHO) confirms three new cases of “H5N1” in Vietnam. Of the three individuals infected, two died. Since mid-December 2004, 20 of the 63 cases of “H5N1” in Vietnam have been fatal. The Lancet publishes an article on 12 August 2005 saying the flu drug Relenza is at least as effective as Tamiflu, but has fewer side effects and there is no evidence of resistance to Relenza, compared with resistance levels of up to 18% in those taking Tamiflu. The researchers recommend stockpiling both drugs.Vaccine manufacturer Maine Biological Labs is fined $500,000 for smuggling a chicken flu virus into the US. In 1998 the Maine biotechnology company illegally imported the virus from Saudi Arabia so that it could develop a vaccine for a disease-plagued poultry farm in that country. The company then used falsified documents to send 8000 bottles of the newly-created vaccine back to Saudi Arabia. WHO recommends that regional offices stockpile drugs against bird flu. The plan suggests that each office should stockpile drugs for a 5-day course of Oseltamivir (Tamiflu) for 30% of workers and their families. Both Russia and Kazakhstan report outbreaks of avian influenza in poultry in late July that are confirmed “H5N1” in early August. Outbreaks in both countries were attributed to contact between domestic birds and wild waterfowl via shared water sources. In early August, an outbreak of “H5N1” in poultry was detected in Tibet. Mongolia then issues an emergency report following the death of 89 migratory birds at two lakes in the northern part of the country.

2005 (August) Deception appears to be the name of the game when the facts reveal that current medical practices are doing major harm to America’s children. The media is often deceived by medical “experts” whose agenda the reporters don’t recognize. NBC’s moderator, Tim Russert, appears to have been “had” when he accepted as Gospel what Dr. Feinberg’s false claim that since 2003 there has been no Thimerosal preservative used in any vaccines given to infants (other than flue vaccine).

FDA’s current table of vaccine contents calls the lie.
(See: http://www.FDA.gov/cber/vaccine/thimerosal.htm). “The latest table still lists Multiple dose DT by Aventis Pastuer ltd as fully preserved; TT vaccine is preserved with Thimerasol; Japanese encephalitis vaccine JE-VAC is thimerasol preserved; Meningococcal vaccine (Menomune) in multidose vials is preserved with Thirmerasol. Tim Russert’s effort to reassure parents that there is no longer any thimerasol in any vaccines was inappropriate–as it helps perpetrate deceptions.

21CFR610.15(A) is part of the Code of Federal regulations. It is a law and it is legally binding. It states that a manufacturer must prove that the component is “safe” before putting it into a vaccine as a preservative. This SAFETY test has never been done. And FDA has never been taken to task for allowing preservatives that are known to cause neurological damage to be used in vaccines. According to our testing results from January of this year, there are vaccines that contained from .019 micrograms up to 66 micrograms per mL that either expired in 2005 or won’t expire until 2006. The flu vaccine we tested that expired in June 2005 contained 48 micrograms per mL, or 24 micrograms per adult dose (and I assume 12 micrograms per adolescent dose) and that it is being used as a preservative.” Dawn Winkler, Executive Director, Health Advocacy in the Public Interest (HAPI) http://www.hapihealth.com.

2005 Biodefense and Pandemic and Vaccine and Drug Development Act is passed by George Bush’s Administration, largely mediated by Dr. Bill Frist by changing sentences buried in thousand-page-long documents hours before the huge documents are presented to officials in Congress for a vote.

The Biodefense and Pandemic and Vaccine and Drug Development bill is a bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to enhance biodefense and pandemic preparedness activities, to use untested vaccines, drugs, medical products, or “security countermeasures.” without any liability for claims for loss of property, personal injury, or death arising out of, reasonably relating to, or resulting from the design, development, clinical testing and investigation, manufacture, labeling, distribution, sale, purchase, donation, dispensing, prescribing, administration, or use of a security countermeasure or qualified pandemic or epidemic product distributed, sold, purchased, donated, dispensed, prescribed, administered, or used in anticipation of and preparation for, in defense against, or in response to, or recovery from an actual or potential public health emergency that is a designated security countermeasure or a qualified pandemic or epidemic product…” (http://thomas.loc.gov/ Search Bill Title or Number – S.1873RS click ‘enter bill number).’

2005 Newsweek reports that VaxGen, a little-known California biotechnology company, will start its first delivery of its anthrax vaccine to the government six months later than originally slated. The company was awarded an $877.5 million contract to produce and manufacture the vaccine, which was developed by the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID). Seventy five million doses of VaxGen’s vaccine are to be procured for the Strategic National Stockpile under Project Bioshield, a joint Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) initiative to stimulate the creation of a domestic biodefense industry. Five million doses of Vaxgen competitor Bioport’s vaccine were procured earlier this year in response to Bioport’s aggressive lobbying and anti-VaxGen campaign. VaxGen’s vaccine has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Bioport’s vaccine, which has been used by the Defense Department, has been controversial because of its side effects and its FDA approval has been disputed (Project On Government Oversight, Vera Hassner Sharav).

2005 (September) Three more laboratory-confirmed cases of “H5N1” strike Indonesia. A 37-year-old woman dies on 10th September and is the fourth fatality associated with “H5N1” to hit the country. Indonesia’s third laboratory-confirmed case of “H5N1” since July 2005 involves an 8-year-old boy who survives. Later, a 27-year-old woman from Jakarta, who developed symptoms after direct contact with diseased and dying chickens in her household, dies on 26 September. Viet Nam officials retrospectively confirm an additional fatal case of “H5N1” infection, bringing the total in Viet Nam since mid-December 2004 to 64 cases, a third of which (21) were fatalities.Two independent studies, each reaching different conclusions, suggest it would be possible to contain an emerging pandemic if the virus was detected quickly, if it did not spread too fast, if sufficient antiviral drugs were deployed around the outbreak’s epicentre, and if strict quarantine and other measures were also used employed. President George W. Bush calls for an international partnership that would require countries facing an influenza outbreak to share information and samples with the WHO. But experts say research would speed up if the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) influenza branch threw open its databases of virus sequences and immunological and epidemiological data, and complain that too few of the flu data collected by the CDC are made generally available.

2005 (October) Greece becomes the first EU country with a bird flu infection as the country’s Centre for Veterinary Institutes detects bird flu in one turkey on the eastern Aegean island of Chios. Officials confirm the virus is a member of the “H5 strain,” but not yet identified as “H5N1.” The WHO reiterates that the level of pandemic alert remains unchanged at phase 3: a virus new to humans is causing infections, but does not spread easily from one person to another. On 13 October WHO states that tests conducted by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) confirm the presence of “H5N1” avian influenza in samples taken from domestic birds in Turkey. Days later, the presence of the virus is confirmed in Romania. A fifth laboratory-confirmed case of “H5N1” is reported from Indonesia on 10 October 2005. The 21-year old Sumatran man had contact with diseased chickens shortly before he became ill. The case brings the total number of human infections with influenza A (“H5N1”) since December 2003 to 117.
http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/avianflu/timeline.html

2005 (November) Chinese scientists report “H5N1” avian flu infection in pigs, raising concerns that the virus could exchange genes with human flu strains in this ‘mixing vessel’. None of these pigs was ill, according to National Geographic article, Nov. 2005. “H5N1” virus has spread throughout most of SE Asia, resulting in the culling of over 100 million chickens. In Vietnam and Thailand, the pandemic has infected at least 37 people, with 26 deaths.

2006 (March) Article appears in the New England Journal of Medicine confirming that “HIV” tests show positive results after recent flu vaccination. (Christian, P. Erickson,Todd McNiff, Jeffrey D. Klausner. Influenza Vaccination and False Positive HIV Results New England Journal of Medicine, Number 13, Volume 354:1422-1423, March 30, 2006).

2006 (March) An article in the March 10, 2006 issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (JPandS.org) shows that since mercury was removed from childhood vaccines, the alarming increase in reported rates of autism and other neurological disorders (NDs) in children not only stopped, but actually dropped sharply – by as much as 35%.

Using the government’s own databases, David A. Geier, B.A. and Mark R. Geier, M.D., Ph.D. analyzed reports of childhood NDs, including autism, before and after removal of mercury-based preservatives. The authors analyzed data from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and the California Department of Developmental Services (CDDS) in “Early Downward Trends in Neurodevelopmental Disorders Following Removal of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines.”

“The numbers from California show that reported autism rates hit a high of 800 in May 2003. If that trend had continued, the reports would have skyrocketed to more than 1000 by the beginning of 2006. But in fact, the Geiers report that the number went down to only 620, a real decrease of 22%, and a decrease from theprojections of 35%. This analysis directly contradicts 2004 recommendations of the Institute of Medicine which examined vaccine safety data from the National Immunization Program (NIP) of the CDC. While not willing to either rule out or to corroborate a relationship between mercury and autism, the IOM soft-pedaled its findings, and decided no more studies were needed. The authors write: “The IOM stated that the evidence favored rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal and autism, that such a relationship was not biologically plausible, and that no further studies should be conducted to evaluate it.”

2006 (March) Chiron Recalls Nearly 5.5 Million Vaccine Doses. California-based biotechnology company Chiron Corp. announced Thursday that it’s recalling and withdrawing almost 5.5 million doses of a measles, mumps and rubella vaccine distributed to developing countries and in Italy. The move was made because the vaccine caused a higher rate of such adverse effects such as fever, allergic reactions and glandular swelling than other similar vaccines, the Associated Press reported. The reactions occurred just after inoculation and do not indicate any long-term risk, according to Chiron, which described the recall and withdrawal as a precaution. About five million doses of the vaccine were distributed to developing countries and about 450,000 doses were distributed in Italy. Other Chiron vaccines are not affected by the recall, the AP reported. In 2004, Chiron failure to deliver half the United States’ expected 100 million flu shots triggered widespread public health concern. The company couldn’t fill the order because contaminated vaccine was discovered at its plant in Liverpool, England. Last fall, Chiron said problems at the same plant meant the company wouldn’t ship out as many flu shots as initially planned.

2006 (April) Associated press releases article claiming that Bangladesh will vaccinate about 18 million children aged 5 and under to combat polio, which recently re-emerged after authorities believed it had been eradicated five years ago, the country’s health minister said Saturday. Bangladesh carried out extensive vaccination programs in 1995-2004, with the last polio case reported in August 2000, according to the government and WHO.

2006 During National Infant Immunization week, statistics are released that show to date, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has paid $1.2 billion to families who have proven that their children suffer permanent disabilities or have died from a vaccine reaction. Less than 25 percent of families who apply through VICP ever get compensated. Many more families never apply for compensation since they do not recognize the symptoms of vaccine damage.

2006 (June)Press Release For Immediate Release June 29, 2006. Contact: CDC Media Relations. Phone: (404) 639-3286 CDC’s Advisory Committee Recommends Changes in Varicella Vaccinations. Second dose of varicella vaccine to offer more protection for children, adolescents, and adults

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in its meeting in Atlanta today, voted to recommend a second dose of varicella (chickenpox) vaccine for children four to six years old to further improve protection against the disease. The first dose of varicella vaccine is recommended at 12 to 15 months old.

Fifteen to 20 percent of children who have received one dose of the vaccine are not fully protected and may develop chickenpox after coming in contact with varicella zoster virus. Additionally, one dose of the vaccine may not continue to provide protection into adulthood when chickenpox is more severe. A second dose of varicella vaccine provides increased protection against varicella disease compared to one-dose. The ACIP also recommended that children, adolescents and adults who previously received one dose should receive a second dose.

We have made great progress in reducing chickenpox during the past ten years,” said Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. “This recommendation will further reduce outbreaks of chickenpox and provide better individual protection.”

Before licensure of the varicella vaccine in 1995, each year there were about four million cases of varicella, 13,500 hospitalizations and 150 deaths (yet in NY State alone, the register claims 64 potential deaths and 54 actual deaths for that state alone). Cases of varicella have steadily declined 80 to 85 percent in surveillance sites since the licensure. From 1995 to 2001, varicella hospitalizations declined by 72 percent and deaths, among those 50 years old and younger, decreased by 75% or more.

However, in recent years varicella outbreaks have continued to occur among vaccinated school children. During these chickenpox outbreaks, between 11 and 17 percent of vaccinated children developed varicella. Varicella in vaccinated children is usually mild, but the children are contagious and can transmit the virus to others including their parents who are at higher risk of severe disease.

The ACIP, consisting of 15 members appointed by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), advises the director of CDC and Secretary of HHS on control of vaccine-preventable disease and vaccine usage. Recommendations of the ACIP become CDC policy when they are accepted by the director of CDC and are published in CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). There are no federal laws requiring the immunization of children. All school and daycare entry laws are state laws and vary from state to state.

2006 (Sept 1) Polio reported on the rise in Nigeria Lagos, Nigeria despite near-universal vaccination. Nigerian authorities on Friday reported a sharp rise in the number of polio cases in Africa’s most populous country over recent months, despite a government immunization drive.

“A total of 784 cases of the disease were registered in 17 states at the end of July, the National Programme on Immunisation said. In June the figures were 501 cases in 15 states, compared to 244 cases in 18 states for the same period in 2005, it said in a statement.”

“From June 29 to July 3, Nigerian health officials in collaboration with United Nations health agencies launched an ambitious five-day Polio Plus immunization campaign of 10-million children in northern Nigeria aimed at eradicating the deadly disease from the country by the end of 2006.”

2006 One of the chief dissenters of AIDSVAX, the failed program now funded to make an antrhax vaccine for 887 million of taxpayer money following announcement of that failure, Robert C. Gallo, who helped discover “the human immunodeficiency virus,” not only in art work but on blacks after it had jumped onto them from monkeys during the slave trade, scoffs at the notion that the trial will be successful.

“I thought we’d learn more if we had extract of maple leaf in the vaccine,” he said derisively.

2006 Toronto International AIDS Conference. Barre-Sinoussi (one of Montagnier’s original group who thought “HIV” was associated with AIDS and who received the Nobel with Montagnier in 2009) “came out of the closet” http://www.aids2006.org/PAG/PSession.aspx?s=653):

It is not clear if therapeutic vaccines might be useful, since 15 trials to date have not demonstrated definitive evidence of improved outcomes.”

2006 (October 6) FDA recalls Home Access Health Corporation (Hoffman Illinois) Home Access and Home Access Express HIV-1 Test System lots 042108, 042109, 042110, 042111, 042113, 052101, 042010, 042011, 042012, 042013, 042014, 042015, 042016, 042017, 052001. “The lancets may not be sterile as of the printed “Use By” date. These lots should have been labeled with a “Use By” date of October 2006. HAHC recommends that these lots be removed from distribution and they will not be able to provide results for any blood specimen collected after October 31, 2006.” It isn’t clear how aseptically-sealed blood-letting lancets lose their sterility over time.

2006 December Senate approves Burr’s bioterrorism bill-a bill to establish the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, commonly referred to as BARDA, which passed by unanimous consent. The bill describes how forced vaccines and quarantines should be signed into law as the ‘debate’ regarding Bush’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and “rooting out terrorism” continues.

2006 FDA recalls Vironostika HIV-1 test kit lots: 259606, 121566, 1008926, 259606, 121567, 1008926, 259606,121568, 1008926, 259605, 259717, 160342, 1011220, 259605, 259717,160339, 1011021.”These HIV-1 finished kit lots in the field have been reported to contain EnzAbody reagent that appears noticeably cloudy and/or flocculent, instead of clear and non-turbid as expected 30 minutes after reconstitution. Use of cloudy EnzAbody could possibly increase your risk of inaccurate HIV test results in patients and therefore should be avoided.” Patients who were diagnosed positive with them are never informed.

2006 A nationwide team of AIDS researchers led by doctors Benigno Rodriguez and Michael Lederman of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland dispute the value of viral load tests-a standard used since 1996 to assess health, predict progression to disease, and grant approval to new AIDS drugs after their study of 2,800 HIV positives concluded viral load measures failed in more than 90% of cases to predict or explain immune status…“Viral load is only able to predict progression to disease in 4% to 6% of HIV-positives studied, challenging much of the basis for current AIDS science and treatment policy” (Rodriquez B, Sethi AK, Cheruvu VK, et al. Predictive value of plasma HIV RNA level on rate of CD4 T-cell decline in untreated HIV infection. JAMA 296(12):1498-506, 2006).

2006 (November) Cervical cancer vaccination funding for Australian girls rejected. CSL Limited, Australia’s leading biopharmaceutical company, announced that the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) rejected CSL’s funding application for its cervical cancer vaccine GARDASIL(r). CSL applied to the PBAC for National Immunisation Program funding for the vaccine for three groups of women, based on the use approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). An ongoing cohort of 11-12 year old girls delivered through a schools-based program at the end of primary school, a catch-up program for high-school girls (aged 13-18) delivered through secondary schools and a general practice based program for women aged 19-26. Although disappointed, CSL remains committed to securing Government funding for GARDASIL in Australia and will continue to work closely with the Government and PBAC until this is achieved.

Last week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued new immunization schedules, including the first separate ones for adolescents. The recommendations cover two new vaccines for teenagers: one for the virus that causes cervical cancer and the other for a bacterium that causes meningitis and other diseases.

The agency has updated its recommended list of vaccines several times over the past 15 years, always after lengthy debate. Each state, rather than the C.D.C., decides which vaccines to make compulsory for entry into school. And some new vaccines are recommended rather than required because their prices are so high.

The timing of injections is complex, and must be overseen by a doctor. But in general, these are the recommendations:

By age 6

Polio
Measles
Mumps
Rubella
Chickenpox
Diphtheria
Tetanus
Whooping cough
Hib (meningitis)
PCV (pneumonia)
Rotavirus (diarrhea)
Hepatitis A and B
Flu (annually)

By age 18

Cervical cancer* (Incorrectly said to be caused by “human papillomaviruses”)
Meningococcus (bacterial infection)

From 18-65
Between ages 18-65, the vaccination you should get depends on risk factors:
Flu (annually when available, always after age 50)
Tetanus and diphtheria (every 10 years)
Measles, mumps, rubella, chicken-pox (for everyone not previously infected)

Some high-risk categories:
MULTIPLE DISEASES: Military recruits, health care workers, emergency
responders, sewer workers

HEPATITIS: Gay men, sex workers, drug injectors

PLAGUE, RABIES: Veterinarians, animal handlers

ANTHRAX: Hide handlers

BY REGION: Travelers and immigrants may need vaccination, depending on their location. People with compromised immune systems should not take some vaccines.

By age 65
Pneumococcal pneumonia flu (annually)

*Girls only; an HPV vaccine for boys is being developed. (Source by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).

2006 (December) Despite the 2004-5 west African polio eradication campaign intended as a final push to stamp out the disease in the region and is part of the World Health Organization’s 15 year drive to halt transmission of the poliomyelitis virus across the world by 2005, the CDC, and WHO report that Nigeria now leads the world in new polio cases http://www.who.int/vaccines/immunization_monitoring/en/diseases/poliomyelitis/afpextract.cfm.

-Country: Nigeria
-Year: 2006
-AFP cases (acute flaccid paralysis) reported: 4937
-Non-polio AFP rate: 6.7%
-AFP rate with adequate specimens: 88
-Total confirmed polio cases: 1044
-Wild-virus confirmed polio cases: 1043
-Polio cases attributed to vaccine: 9

2007 (January) “Virological failure” is a technical term among “HIV/AIDS” promoters that simply means a lethal and toxic liver-destroying drug has failed to suppress “virus” because it doesn’t work and patients tend to die taking the drugs anyway. On January 11, 2007 in the New England Journal of Medicine, it was reported by Max Essex’s Harvard group that nevirapine (withdrawn because of its toxicity in the U.S. and instead given to pregnant African women in order to experiment on them) increases the failure of the drug cocktail by 41.7% compared to controls:

Nevirapine remains central to the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and to combination antiretroviral treatment throughout much of the developing world. Nevirapine administered as one dose to the mother and one to the newborn reduces mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 by 41 to 47%, and well over 875,000 women and infants have received a single dose of nevirapine. A single dose of nevirapine is the cornerstone of the regimen recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) to prevent mother-to-child transmission among women without access to antiretroviral treatment and among those not meeting treatment criteria. However, nevirapine resistance is detected (with the use of standard genotyping techniques) in 20 to 69% of women and 33 to 87% of infants after exposure to a single, peripartum dose of nevirapine. Among 60 women starting antiretroviral treatment within 6 months after receiving placebo or a single dose of nevirapine, no women in the placebo group and 41.7% in the nevirapine group had virologic failure (P

2007 (March) ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION (AHRP)
Promoting Openness, Full Disclosure, and Accountability
http://www.ahrp.org <http://www.ahrp.org/&gt; and http://ahrp.blogspot.com
<http://ahrp.blogspot.com/&gt;

Two weeks ago, the controversial anthrax vaccine which has not been fully tested for safety, became mandatory for the military. Since then, Meryl Nass, MD, (AHRP board member) has received numerous requests for help and information from military personnel who refuse to be vaccinated with this controversial vaccine.

The military has issued an unsigned, anonymous “informational brochure” filled with misinformation about the anthrax vaccine. The very fact that no one in the military wants “credit” for this document should raise red flags about its veracity!

Dr. Nass has appended the DOD “informational brochure” with relevant facts, additional information, comments and copious references about the Surveillance Program for Short-term Health Effects of AVA and Surveillance Program for Long-term Health Effects of AVA. She demonstrates how the DOD misrepresents the findings of several vaccine safety studies.

For example, Dr. Nass writes:
Military medical providers have been loathe to file anthrax vaccine adverse event reports due to perceived adverse effects on their careers if they do so. This probably stems from the instruction to medical providers NOT to report adverse events unless the patient missed more than 24 hours of work, was hospitalized, or contamination of an entire lot of vaccine was suspected.[1]

Therefore, after changing this guidance in response to Congressional testimony about the failures to file,[2] repeated instructions to file these reports by top military leaders have been issued to providers in 1999,[3] 2000[4] and 2004.[5] This would suggest that military medical providers continued to fail to file the reports.

See complete annotated document at: http://www.anthraxvaccine.org/NassDOD.htm

References:

[1] <http://www.anthraxvaccine.org/NassDOD.htm#_ftnref1&gt; Instructions fromSecretary of the Navy: SECNAVINST 6230.4. April 29, 1998. ANNEX C TO ENCLOSURE (1). PAGE C-5. It stated, “Report all adverse vaccine reactions resulting in hospitalizations or time lost from duty (more than 24 hours),
using the Health and Human Services Vaccine Adverse Events form. Otherreactions will not be reported unless contamination of lots is suspected.”

[2] <http://www.anthraxvaccine.org/NassDOD.htm#_ftnref2&gt; Hearing, Committee on Government Reform. Subcommittee on National Security, Veterans Affairs and International Relations. Anthrax Vaccine Adverse Reactions. July 21, 1999.

[3] <http://www.anthraxvaccine.org/NassDOD.htm#_ftnref3&gt; Bailey S. (Assistant secretary of defense for Health Affairs). Memorandum for Service Surgeons General. Subject: Policy for reporting adverse events associated with anthrax vaccine. October 15, 1999.

[4] <http://www.anthraxvaccine.org/NassDOD.htm#_ftnref4&gt; Clinton JJ. (Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense). Memorandum for Service Surgeons General. Subject: Reactions to the anthrax vaccine. October 6, 2000.

[5] <http://www.anthraxvaccine.org/NassDOD.htm#_ftnref5&gt; Peake JB. (Lieutenant General Commanding). Memorandum for Commanders, regional Medical Commands. Subject: Learning from adverse events after vaccination-ACTION MEMORANDUM. FEBRUARY 10, 2004.

Read entire critique at: http://www.anthraxvaccine.org/NassDOD.htm

2007 (March) Varicella Vaccine Waning -Waning Immunity with the Varicella Vaccine.
A population-based study shows declining immunity over time in individuals who receive only a single dose of varicella vaccine.

Although varicella incidence has decreased dramatically in the U.S. since the introduction of universal varicella immunization in 1995, disease outbreaks have continued to occur in highly vaccinated populations. Might vaccine-induced immunity diminish with time? To find out, researchers from the CDC and the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services examined varicella surveillance data from Antelope Valley, California (population, 350,000).

From 1995 through 2004, 11,356 cases of varicella were reported in this population, including 1080 cases (9.5%) with onset >42 days after vaccination. During the decade of observation, annual varicella incidence decreased by 85%, and the proportion of cases in immunized children increased from 1% to 60%. Among vaccinated children, the incidence of moderate-to-severe disease increased from 18% in 1995–1998 to 31% in 2001–2004. Moderate-to-severe disease was significantly more likely in 8- to 12-year-olds who had been vaccinated ≥5 years previously than in those vaccinated within the previous 5 years (odds ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.2–5.8). The rate of varicella disease following vaccination increased significantly each year after vaccination, ranging from 1.6 per 1000 person-years in year 1 to 58.2 per 1000 person-years in year 9 which isn’t bad because it is only increased 36 times in the disease frequency among the vaccinated compared to the non-vaccinated!

Comment: These findings were part of the evidence underlying the June 2006 recommendation from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to provide a second dose of varicella vaccine to children aged 4 to 6 years.

Exogenous re-exposure to varicella virus has probably helped in maintaining immunity to this pathogen. Given the ongoing decline in varicella incidence, and thus in opportunities for community exposure to the virus, a second dose of vaccine may also be needed in the future for high-risk populations such as healthcare workers.

Richard T. Ellison III, MD

Published in Journal Watch Infectious Diseases March 14, 2007

Citation(s):

Chaves SS et al. Loss of vaccine-induced immunity to varicella over time. N Engl J Med 2007 Mar 15; 356:1121-9.

2007 (March) MMR, Chicken Pox Vaccines Work For Preemies. Main Category: Pediatrics News
Article Date: 08 Mar 2007 – 11:00 PDT

Vaccines for measles-mumps-rubella and varicella, or chicken pox, are effective in extremely preterm infants, even though preemies’ immune systems are not as developed as full-term babies. This confirms a long-held assumption by pediatricians and neonatologists across the country.”

“The assumption has always been that it would be OK, that very early babies would have enough immunity, but no one had formally researched the subject,” said Carl D’Angio, M.D., associate professor of Pediatrics at the University of Rochester Medical Center, and author of a paper on the subject in Pediatrics this month. “I’m happy be able to reassure my colleagues and parents that it is OK.”

The study, which included 16 term and 16 extremely preterm (born before about 6 1⁄2 months of pregnancy) infants born between May 2002 and May 2005, is the first of its kind to examine the antibody levels of measles, mumps, rubella and varicella in this population before and after vaccination. It was published in this month’s Pediatrics.

The same number of preterm infants and full-term infants in the study reached a level of immunity considered protective against the diseases. This positive outcome, however, was not guaranteed because preemies’ immune systems do not always react the same way as full-term infants [probably because they are in a sterile environment known as the womb, and are protected by maternal antibodies post-partum for 9-18 months-my comment]. For instance, a change in the types of vaccine used in the UK apparently resulted in an increase in Haemophilus influenzae type b infections, like bloodstream infection or meningitis, in children. Children born prematurely appeared to be particularly at risk for this, alluding to potential problems this population may have with responding to vaccines.

That isn’t the case for the MMR and chicken pox vaccines. “Now we can all breathe a sigh of relief. We were right,” D’Angio said.

Although not generally life-threatening, measles, mumps, rubella and chicken pox can all have serious complications. While many adults contracted chicken pox as a childhood rite of passage, the varicella “virus” killed 100 and hospitalized 11,000 people every year before the vaccine became available. (How many are currently hospitalized or killed/year in hospitals from non-defined entities)? Generally, the virus causes a rash, itching, fever and fatigue, but it can also cause severe skin infections, scars, pneumonia and brain damage. And a person who has had chicken pox can get a painful rash called shingles years later, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The measles virus causes a rash, cough, runny nose, eye irritation and fever, but it can also lead to ear infections, pneumonia, seizures, brain damage, and rarely, death. The mumps virus causes fever, headache and swollen glands, but it may also cause deafness, meningitis, painful swelling of the testicles or ovaries, and rarely, death. The rubella virus causes a rash, mild fever and arthritis, but in pregnant women, it can lead to a miscarriage or birth defects, according to the CDC.

D’Angio’s study was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the National Center for Research Resources, both part of the National Institutes of Health. D’Angio is finishing a similar study on the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, which helps prevent meningitis and blood and ear infections, and is in the process of studying the influenza vaccine.

2007 Fri Mar 30, 1:45pm EDT
By Anne Harding

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – Rules that allow parents to exempt their children from immunization requirements for “philosophical” reasons are putting all kids at risk of outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease, Arkansas researchers warn.
Since 2003, when the state began allowing these exemptions from school vaccine rules, rising numbers of children have been going without immunization, Dr. Joseph W. Thompson of the Arkansas Center for Health Improvement in Little Rock and colleagues found.
Arkansas had previously allowed exemption from vaccine requirements for religious or medical reasons, but parents had to belong to a “recognized religion that included tenets against immunization” for the exemption to be allowed, Thompson and colleagues explain in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
Parents challenged the law, and a federal court ruled that requiring a religion to be “recognized” was not constitutional. Arkansas now allows religious, philosophical and medical exemptions, which must be renewed annually.
Since the change, Thompson and his team found, the number of exemptions requested by parents has steadily risen, while the percentage of exemptions that are non-medical has made up an increasingly large portion of the total.

For example, in 2001 (when the philosophical exemption was not available) there were 419 religious exemptions and 110 medical exemptions statewide. In 2004-2005, there were 721 philosophical exemptions, 362 religious exemptions, and 62 medical exemptions.

And in the 10 districts with the highest exemption rates, none were medical.
In order for vaccines to be effective, Thompson noted, they must provide an individual with immunity, and they must also provide “herd” immunity by covering a certain percentage of people in the community, estimated to be at least 93 percent for measles, for example.

“Concentrations of children who are not immunized could result in a loss of community-level immunity and ultimately erode public health protection against vaccine-preventable illness,” the researchers warn.
Q “Nationwide we’re seeing parents increasingly undervalue the protection that vaccines give because the diseases they have never seen,” Thompson said. “When polio affected a child in every school, the polio vaccine was rapidly adopted.”
According to Thompson, policymakers and medical professionals need to do a better job of informing parents about the risks and benefits of vaccines. “Just throwing information at them without putting it in the context of what their concerns are probably is not going to be very valuable.”
SOURCE: American Journal of Preventive Medicine, March 2007.

2007 April. FDA recall of Combivir/Ziagen (lamivudine and zidovudine) Tablets, counterfit labels.

2007 June. HIV infection theory challenged:

“T cells are lost at a slow rate. A longstanding theory of how HIV slowly depletes the body’s capacity to fight infection is wrong, scientists say.”

“The researchers used a mathematical model of the processes by which T cells are produced and eliminated.”

“Using this they showed that the current theory of an uncontrolled cycle of T cell activation, infection, HIV production and cell destruction – dubbed the “runaway” hypothesis – was flawed.”

“They concluded that it could not explain the very slow pace of depletion that occurs in HIV infection.”

“If the theory were correct, then T helper cell numbers would fall to very low levels over a number of months, not years.”

2007 (July) The clout of the immense pharmaceutical giants is used to persuade and coerce state and national government officials to embrace massive, expensive vaccination programs. For example, over the last seven years, the industry has contributed more than $800 million in federal and state lobbying and campaign donations. No other industry has spent more money to sway public policy to use their products: drugs and vaccines. (REF: “Drug Lobby Second to None.” Center for Public Integrity. July 7, 2007).

2007 July. Six health care workers that were to be placed before a firing squad in Libya for “infecting 426 children” are released because “black health care workers from sub-Saharan Africa are blamed instead by Luc Montagnier for spreading “the infection:”

Epilogue in Libya: A spreading AIDS epidemic By Elisabeth Rosenthal
Thursday, July 26, 2007:

ROME: Five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor landed in Sofia this week, freed of a death sentence after eight years in Libyan prisons, an apparent victory of diplomacy at long last.

Officially, two visits to Libya by Cécilia Sarkozy, the French president’s wife, precipitated the release of the six medics who had been found guilty – not once, but twice – of infecting more than 400 children with HIV as part of a plot by the Israeli secret service.

Sarkozy’s visit was only the latest in countless pilgrimages by diplomats and scientists to the Libyan leader, Muammar el-Qaddafi, to plead the medics’ cause. Recent visitors included the U.S. secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, the European Union’s external relations commissioner, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, and Richard Roberts, a Nobel laureate, who represented more than 100 Nobel Prize winners.

He and another expert, Dr. Luc Montagnier, the French virologist whose team discovered HIV, concluded that the AIDS virus was present in the hospital before the nurses arrived, probably brought to Libya by guest workers from countries in sub-Saharan Africa. (In other words, it the fault of the blacks, if this quote from Montagnier is accurate).

Comment: In other words, Montagnier claims that the “epidemic” of more than 400 “HIV/AIDS” cases in hospitalized children in Lybia “treated” by the 5 nurses and one doctor was instead really caused by Black people coming up to work in (and around?) the Lybian hospital from “Sub-Saharan” Africa, somehow.

2007 On Monday, July 23, 2007, in Nkange, Botswana, it was reported that (Craig Timberg Washington Post Foreign Service) in Botswana, step to cut AIDS proves a formula for disaster:

Doctors noticed two troubling things about the limp, sunken-eyed children who flooded pediatric wards across Botswana during the rainy season in early 2006: They were dying from diarrhea, a malady that is rarely fatal here. And few of their mothers were breast-feeding, a practice once all but universal.

After the outbreak was over and at least 532 children had died — 20 times the usual toll for diarrhea — a team of U.S. investigators solved the terrible riddle.

A decade-long, global push to provide infant formula to mothers with the AIDS virus had backfired in Botswana, leaving children more vulnerable to other, more immediately lethal diseases, the U.S. team found after investigating the outbreak at the request of Botswana’s government.

2007 July – A total recall of an important AIDS drug widely used in developing countries has disrupted treatment for tens of thousands of the world’s poorest patients, with no clear word from the manufacturer on when shipments will resume.

The recall of the drug, Viracept, by Roche Pharmaceuticals of Switzerland, went largely unnoticed in the developed world when it was announced in early June, after the company had discovered that some batches made at its Swiss plant contained a dangerous chemical. But the recall has caused growing concern among global health officials and in AIDS programs in many poor nations. They say the company did an inadequate job of informing patients and officials about the potential risks and helping them find affordable access to newer alternative drugs.

2007 “September AIDS Effort Suffers Big Blow As Merck Vaccine Fails to evoke seroconversion or protection from “HIV,” by Marilyn Chase and Mark Schoofs:

“In a major setback, one of the leading experimental AIDS vaccines not only failed to prevent test subjects from becoming infected with HIV, but it didn’t offer any indication it might delay the onset of full-blown AIDS, which had been a key hope.”

The collapse of the trial leaves Merck & Co., which had spent a decade developing the vaccine, with no remaining prospects in the global hunt for an AIDS immunization. The vaccine was tested in a network funded by the National Institutes of Health.”

“We’ve been kicked in the teeth,” said Bruce Walker, a veteran AIDS researcher at Harvard University who wasn’t involved in the study. Lawrence Corey, a leader of the NIH-funded HIV Vaccine Trials Network, said he was ‘mourning.’”

The vaccine’s failure to protect recipients from acquiring “HIV” was also a big disappointment to the recipients of the anti-“HIV” vaccine. The “HIV” vaccine recipients tested positive for “HIV” slightly more frequently than the non-“HIV”-vaccinated, but the differences between the groups were not significant in any arms of the STEP trial, or in any other “HIV” vaccine trial. All of these men who now test “HIV-positive” will be regarded and treated now as AIDS patients.

MORE SUCCESS WITH ANIMAL MODELS OF “HIV/AIDS:

Although SIV has always been a better model of “HIV” than “HIV,” because the chimps that were injected with “HIV” or AIDS patient sera more than 20 years ago never became ill, as they were recently built new retirement homes, at least one group of investigators recently challenged this long-standing belief: Sodora’s paper provides evidence, using the sooty mangabey SIV natural host, that virally induced CD4 T-cell depletion, by itself, is not sufficient to induce AIDS in a natural host. “When we first observed the dramatic CD4 depletion in all the tissues we examined in these monkeys, we were concerned that they might begin to exhibit clinical signs of AIDS,” said Jeffrey Milush, Ph.D., lead author on the paper. “But after more than six years, we are sure that CD4 depletion by itself does not necessarily result in progression to AIDS”.

Sodora contributed to a second paper, with senior author Guido Silvestri, M.D., of the University of Pennsylvania. In a study of disease free SIV–infected sooty mangabeys, Silvestri proposes that these African monkeys preserve immune function despite a major loss of mucosal CD4 T-cells as a result of an evolutionary adaptation to reduce immune activation in response to virus replication.

The third of the three papers published this week in The Journal of Immunology, with Ivona Pandrea, M.D., Ph.D., and Cristian Apetrei, M.D., Ph.D., from Tulane University as lead authors, shows that a severe loss of intestinal CD4 T-cells in another natural host, the African green monkey, is also not predictive of SIV virulence.

2007113 vaccine antigens from at least 10 different vaccines had been added as school requirements. Many parents are asking: How many more vaccines are going to be forced on children in order to obtain tax-funded, public education? Now, more than ever, parents are starting to say no. Many parents blame the health problems of their children on the sheer number of vaccines and additives they receive. Tens of thousands of parents have watched their children regress into poor health after vaccinations. They believe their children are at high risk and may suffer reactions from further doses. Parents who barely questioned their doctors’ decisions in the past are now becoming informed and challenging vaccination recommendations. Many are choosing the risk of the infection over the risk of the vaccine. Legitimate concerns have been met by steely resistance from the medical profession and public health officials. A flurry of articles, closed-door meetings, congressional hearings and position papers from the Institutes of Medicine defend the national vaccination program as widely accepted, an economic necessity and a small personal sacrifice for the good of the community. Resisters are marginalized as “wackos who believe in conspiracy theories.” This tactic is not new. As far back as 1894, those who opposed vaccination were blasted in the New York Times as engaging “in a futile attempt to head off human progress and to reopen a question about which pretty much all of the world has made up its mind.” REF: Cited in Brooklyn Medical Journal. 8(1894):576 and reference in Colgrove, p.14.

October 25, 2007; Thursday Warning Is Sent to AIDS Vaccine Volunteers: South Africans Among Recipients Who May Be at Higher Risk of Contracting Virus. , Page A20, By Craig Timberg. JOHANNESBURG, Oct. 24 — South African AIDS researchers have begun warning hundreds of volunteers that a highly touted experimental vaccine they received in recent months might make them more, not less, likely to contract HIV in the midst of one of the world’s most rampant epidemics.

The move stems from the discovery last month that an AIDS vaccine developed by Merck & Co. might have led to more infections than it averted among study subjects in the United States and other countries. Among those who received at least two doses of the vaccine, 19 contracted HIV compared with 11 of those given placebos.

2008 January. Prince George’s County, Upper Marlboro, Maryland (CNN). A crowd of frustrated parents gathered on a chilly Saturday morning outside Prince George’s County Circuit Court to comply with an order from the school system to have their children vaccinated — or else.

Prince George’s County State’s Attorney Glenn Ivey, whose office began the effort, was at the courthouse to answer questions.

Judge C. Philip Nichols, who signed the letters threatening parents with jail or fines, said he felt the tactic worked.

“We got a thousand kids back in school just by sending one letter,” he said.

Nichols ordered parents to come to court Saturday to either immunize the children on the spot, or to provide proof that they already had their shots, according to The Associated Press.

Families who failed to comply could face 10 to 30 days in jail.

“The schools started out with phone calls, even home visits, and this became a last resort for parents who wouldn’t comply one way or another,” Ivey said.

All states require school-age children to be immunized against diseases (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/contagious_and_infectious_diseases) such as mumps, measles and polio. But the parents said they objected to the heavy-handed way Ivey has handled the issue.

Families could opt out of the required shots by providing medical or religious waivers. Citing cases of serious adverse reactions, some parents worry about the safety of vaccines.

“The patient should have a choice. I just don’t think Big Brother should have that much power,” said Donna Hurlock, a physician and activist concerned about parental rights and privacy issues.

Jim Moody was among the parents protesting the policy.

“There are serious considerations for safety that need to be addressed before compelling people to get vaccines,” he said.

Public health officials said the benefits of vaccinations against childhood diseases outweigh the risks.

Some parents who received letters saying they were not in compliance with the vaccination mandate complained that it was the fault of the school system, which they described as disorganized.

“It was the school’s mistake. [My daughter] didn’t have documentation. This is the second or third time we had to redo her again because her shot records got misplaced,” Ron Brooking told CNN.

Authorities said they will decide in the next few days what to do with families who refused to obey the vaccination order.

Ivey was still mulling whether to prosecute parents not in compliance.

“We have to sit down with school and health services,” he told the AP. “We haven’t ruled anything out. We need to figure out where we stand.”

The parents of about 1,700 children received letters from Ivey reminding them of the consequences for not complying, said John White, spokesman for Prince George’s County Public Schools.

That number was down to 1,111 by Thursday, and was reduced to 939 children by Saturday evening, he said.

White said that number was the lowest since since a law requiring additional vaccinations went into effect January 1.

But “obviously, we still have some more work to do,” he told the AP. 101 vaccinations were administered at the courthouse and 71 records were updated, he said.

2008 (January 1) 18 states allow an exemption to the procedure based on philosophical opposition to vaccination: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin. Mississippi, which has only a medical exemption for the public school system, allows an automatic exemption for home-schooled students. REF: Home School Legal Defense Association.
http://www .hslda.org/Legislation/State/wv/2007/WVSB91/default.asp

2008 January 3, NEJM Volume 358:93-94, Number 1

Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes By Thompson, W. W.

To the Editor: “Thompson et al. (Sept. 27 issue) reports about the results of a study investigating the neuropsychological outcomes of early exposure to thimerosal. As a dissenting member of the panel of external consultants for this study, I object to the authors’ conclusion that there is no causal association between thimerosal and children’s brain function. The sample comprised children who were least likely to exhibit neuropsychological impairments. Specifically, children with congenital problems, those from multiple births, those of low birth weight, and those not living with their biological mother were excluded. The sample was skewed toward higher socioeconomic status and maternal education — factors that are associated with lower rates of neurobehavioral problems and higher intervention rates and that were not measured. The sampling frame included only children enrolled from birth in the health maintenance organization (HMO) and still enrolled after 7 to 10 years, excluding children in higher-mobility families, who tend to have lower academic and behavioral function.2 Children with neurobehavioral problems may have been less likely to remain with the HMO. Only 30% of families selected for recruitment participated, a low rate for scientific research. Among the families selected for recruitment, 26% refused to participate. Another 28% “could not be located,” which included families that did not respond to multiple recruitment attempts (internal documentation from the study contractor, Abt Associates) — another form of refusal.”

2008, June. HPV Vaccination: Is It Cost-Effective?

Immunizing preteens before sexual exposure makes economic sense; cost-effectiveness of vaccinating older teens and young-adult females is less clear. By Ann J.

In June, 2008, the reported death toll linked to Gardasil vaccine rises. Complications include shock, ‘foaming at mouth,’ convulsions, coma. Posted: June 30, 2008 10:18 pm Eastern, 2008 (WorldNetDaily).

“Anaphylactic shock,” “foaming at mouth,” “grand mal convulsion,” “coma” and “now paralyzed” are a few of the startling descriptions included in a new federal report describing the complications from Merck & Co.’s Gardasil medication for sexually transmitted human papillomavirus – which has been proposed as mandatory for all schoolgirls.

The document was obtained from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration by Judicial Watch, a Washington group that investigates and prosecutesgovernment corruption, and it has details of 10 deaths just since September.

“Given all the questions about Gardasil, the best public health policy would be to re-evaluate its safety and to prohibit its distribution to minors. In the least, governments should rethink any efforts to mandate or promote this vaccine for children,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

The organization’s work uncovered reports of about one death each month since last fall, bringing the total death toll from the drug to at least 18 and as many as 20. There also were 140 “serious” reports of complicationsincluding about three dozen classified as life- threatening, 10 spontaneous abortions and half a dozen cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome.

“The document reveals the case of an 18-year-old woman who got the Gardasil vaccine, was found unconscious that evening, and died. Another woman, age 19, got the drug and the next morning was found dead in her bed.”

“The new documents also reveal a total of 8,864 Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System records, up from a total of 3,461 that had been reported in a document just last fall.”

2008 July 10, 12 Babies Die During Vaccine Trials in Argentina. (Trading Markets).
At least 12 infants who were part of a clinical study to test a pneumonia vaccine have died in Argentina over the course of the past year.

The study was sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline, and uses children from poor families. According to the Argentine Federation of Health Professionals, the families are “pressured and forced into signing consent forms.” The vaccine trial is still ongoing despite the denunciations.

2008 (August) Austrian Baxter scientist involved in H1N1 vaccine patent also advises WHO

Baxter’s Vaccine Patent Application US 2009/0060950 A1 gives “Kistner et al” as the applicant for the patent for the H1N1 vaccine that was provisionally filed on August 28, 2008.’

Baxter Files Swine Flu Vaccine Patent A Year Ahead Of Outbreak US20090060950A1 to Baxter International filed 28th August 2008

See Baxter Vaccine Patent Application **US 2009/0060950
A1*<http://www.theoneclickgroup.co.uk/documents/vaccines/Baxter%20Vaccine%20Patent%20Application.pdf&gt;

http://www.theoneclickgroup.co.uk/documents/vaccines/Baxter%20Vaccine%20Patent%20Application.pdf

Baxter are nothing if not prepared for this ‘swine flu’ outbreak if the wording in this 2008 US patent application is anything to go by:

“In particular preferred embodiments the composition or vaccine comprises more than one antigen…..such as influenza A and influenza B in particular selected from of one or more of the human *H1N1*, H2N2, H3N2, H5N1, H7N7, H1N2, H9N2, H7N2, H7N3, H10N7 subtypes, of the pig flu *H1N1,* H1N2, H3N1 and H3N2 subtypes, of the dog or horse flu H7N7, H3N8 subtypes or of the avian H5N1, H7N2, H1N7, H7N3, H13N6, H5N9, H11N6, H3N8, H9N2, H5N2, H4N8, H10N7, H2N2, H8N4, H14N5, H6N5, H12N5 subtypes.”

“Suitable adjuvants can be selected from mineral gels, aluminium hydroxide, surface active substances, lysolecithin, pluronic polyols, polyanions or oil emulsions such as water in oil or oil in water, or a combination thereof. Of course the selection of the adjuvant depends on the intended use. E.g. toxicity may depend on the destined subject organism and can vary from no toxicity to high toxicity.”

“Three different influenza strains, two A-strains Hiroshima (HR, H3N2), a New Calcdonia (NC, H1N1) and a B-strain, Malaysia (MA), were produced in Vero cell cultures. After virus propagation the infectious virus harvest is inactivated prior to purification….”

2008 Tuesday, November 11, Gardasil Linked to Seventy-Eight Outbreaks of Genital Warts by: Joanne Waldron http://www.NaturalNews.com/024774.html&#8221; target=”_blank” title=”

Gardasil Linked to Seventy-Eight Outbreaks of Genital Warts

The Gardasil vaccine has been linked to 78 outbreaks of genital warts, according to an article in The Fiji Times entitled “Are our girls guinea pigs?” by Matelita Ragogo. That’s right. In addition to all of the other adverse reactions to this controversial vaccine, children who receive it are subject to outbreaks of genital warts. Unfortunately, not too many doctors take the time to educate parents about some of these possible reactions prior to giving little girls this expensive jab.

Deaths, Miscarriages and Other Adverse Events

While genital warts are certainly disgusting, parents who think that genital warts are the worst possible adverse reaction to the vaccine should think again. According to Ragogo, as of August 14th, including the 78 outbreaks of genital warts, there have been 9,748 adverse events reported as per Judicial Watch, a non-profit watchdog group. Judicial Watch also reports that there have been 21 deaths, not including the deaths (by miscarriage) of 10 unborn babies.

2008. RESIGNATION LETTER OF DR. STOLLER
K.P. Stoller/Medical Veritas 5 (2008) 16991700 1699 Les Incompétents:
My open letter to the American Academy of Pediatrics. K. Paul Stoller, MD
President, International Hyperbaric Medical Assoc Medical Director, Hyperbaric Medical Center of New Mexico. Email: hbotnm@netzero.net Website: http://www.hbotnm.com

Abstract
A protest resignation from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), by a pediatrician with two decades of membership, is precipitated by the organization’s sellout of the world’s children by a policy that arrogantly and blindly ignored basic toxicology and safety limits when it involved vaccine and enabled a dangerous immunization mandate by the compromised Centers for Disease Control (CDC) via publication of CDC sponsored low quality epidemiology studies showing no connection between vaccines with Thimerosal written by individuals involved in producing Thimerosal-containing vaccines without disclosure (the conclusion of the studies showed Thimerosal removal caused autism). The AAP is fully aware of the untainted CDC analysis presented at the secret Simpsonwood conference and has known for almost a decade that Thimerosal causes neurodevelopmental disorders. Perpetuating the myth that affected children have come to the fore only because of better diagnosing, or because of a genetic epidemic (there are no genetic epidemics), the AAP has helped to subject the world’s children to environmental triggers that effect both mitochondrial function and brain activity. Driven by hubris and the largesse of vaccine manufacturers, the AAP has helped cause the loss of valuable time to rectify the crisis, the loss of a generation of children and perpetuated untold suffering worldwide.

As a pediatrician, who has been a fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) for two decades, I find the AAP’s approach to the autism epidemic to be deeply disturbing. Not only have they allowed the myth of better diagnosing (as the reason for all the notice given to affected children) to be perpetuated, but when they were put on notice at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) Simpsonwood meeting in 2000, that the mercury in the preservative Thimerosal was causing speech delays and learning disabilities, they obfuscated and hid that information. They never made good on their 1999 pledge to have Thimerosal eliminated from vaccines and almost a decade later joined in the protest against a fictitious TV show (Eli Stone) because it was critical of mercury being in vaccines.

Out of about 120 million doses of the worthless [1] flu vaccine shipped for the 2007-08 flu season, no more than about 15 million doses, including the less than 4 million live-virus doses, were no-Thimerosal doses. That means that about 87% contained some level of Thimerosal and at least 42% contained the maximum level (0.01%) of Thimerosal.

If a pregnant woman got a flu shot in 2001 and her child followed the flu shot recommendations, the baby/fetus would have received six flu shots with the full amount of Thimerosal by the year 2005.

Today, in some states, the flu vaccine given to those under 3 year of age are supposed to contain no more than a trace level of Thimerosal, but with no government agency testing vaccines for mercury, the only ones who know whether a preservative-free vaccine (flu or otherwise) actually is mercury free are the manufacturers themselves.

Vaccines with “trace” amounts of Thimerosal are supposed to contain less than 1 microgram of mercury (Hg) per 0.5 ml dose (1 microgram [ìg] of Hg per 0.5 mL is the same as 2 ìg of Hg per mL which is the same as 2000 liter; micrograms per liter is parts per billion [ppb][2])

0.5 parts per billion (ppb) mercury = Kills human neuroblastoma cells (Parran et al., Toxicol Sci 2005; 86: 132-140).

2 ppb mercury = U.S. EPA limit for drinking water
( http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html#mcls).

20 ppb mercury = Neurite membrane structure destroyed (Leong et al., Neuroreport 2001; 12: 733-37).

200 ppb mercury = level in liquid the EPA classifies as hazardous waste
( http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/mercury/ regs.htm#hazwaste)

25,000 ppb mercury = Concentration of mercury in multi-dose, Hepatitis B vaccine vials, administered at birth from 1991-2001 in the U.S.

50,000 ppb mercury = Concentration of mercury in multi-dose DTP and Haemophilus B vaccine vials, administered 8 times in the 1990’s to children at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 18 months of age and currently “preservative” level mercury in multi-dose flu, meningococcal and tetanus (7 and older) vaccines.

For years the Infectious Disease division at the CDC (and others) has said the reason for the dramatic increase in autism is due to “better diagnosing” and “greater awareness.” They have encouraged those like the AAP to manufacture uncertainty by publishing articles that were less than truthful. The AAP shame-fully played along, perhaps encouraged by the largesse of vaccine manufacturers who significantly contribute to the AAP’s yearly budget. To publish studies that showed the removal of a known neurotoxin (mercury) from vaccine caused the incidence of autism to increase was shameful pseudo-science.

There is another budget to consider for eighty percent of autistic Americans under the age of 18, and we will soon begin to see a dramatic impact on Social Security in coming years as these children become dependent adults. There are no studies that have found the previously undiagnosed or misdiagnosed autistic individuals among older Americans. They simply aren’t there. So what is coming will significantly impact on society.

As there are no genetic epidemics, which leaves an epidemic linked to some sort of exposure. Now, the increase of autism has been linked to the increase in mercury exposure through fish and industrial sources, amalgam and additionally, through increased parenteral exposure to Thimerosal – no controlled, randomized study regarding the safety of amalgam or Thimerosal exists.

A recently released Scientific Consensus Statement on Environmental Agents Associated with Neurodevelopmental Disorders (by the Collaborative on Health and the Environment’s Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative) concludes that environmental contaminants are an important cause of learning and developmental disabilities.

Delayed detoxification of mercury severely impairs methylation reactions (required for the correct expression of DNA, RNA, and neurotransmitters), which further adversely affects growth factor derived development of the brain and attention abilities. Phospholipid methylation, which is crucial for attention, is impaired in autistic and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders.

In a first analysis of the VSD datasets, Verstraeten et al. had described a 7.6 to 11.4 fold increase of autism risk in children at one month, with the highest mercury exposure levels compared to children with no exposure. In four subsequent separate generations of the analysis, which involve the exclusion of children with no Thimerosal exposure and less than two polio vaccines, the statistical significance disappeared. This is what was published by the AAP even though they knew the truth. How did they know the truth?

Again, they were presented at the Simpsonwood meeting in June 2000, a meeting that was illegal to hold. No Federal agency is allowed to call a meeting together with representatives of private industry (all the vaccine manufacturers were represented at this meeting) without opening the meeting to the public.

Thimerosal was tested only once, by Eli Lilly on 22 adult patients suffering from meningitis. There was no chance for follow- up to observe long-term effects, as all of the patients in this “study” died. Even if follow-up had been possible, damage to the developing brains of very young children would have remained an unknown. Eli Lilly said it was safe and the medical community accepted it. After the creation of the FDA, its use was simply continued. The federal government has never tested the type of mercury in vaccines for toxicity. This is an unconscionable oversight failure at best, at worse it is an example that we have left consensus reality to be created by the liars, thieves, cheats, killers, and the junk scientists they employ.

How it came to pass the AAP joined these rogues and be-came an active participant in this skullduggery is beyond reason even beyond greed. They have remained silent as mercury-laden vaccine continues to be exported and used in all third world and second world countries.

We are living in a time where an incredible overplay and lies, self-aggrandizing behavior and non-science are the norm. We have tolerated the junk science that has covered up the true cause of this epidemic at a considerable cost to science, the public, and our very way of life in this country. Is it a stretch to realize that by putting our collective heads in the sand about the autism epidemic we have made it possible for the destruction of our very civilization?

Not something easy to contemplate? Then ask why haven’t pediatricians come forward to demand the end of the use of Thimerosal once and for all, and to advocate for the treatment of these children before it is too late? Why are they not at the front of the line protesting the amounts of mercury allowed to come out of coal-fired power plants? Why aren’t they leading the charge to stop the use of mercury amalgam dental fillings that are placed in the mouths of young children and pregnant women?

The very Federal agencies that should have been sounding the alarm bell about environmental pollution creating future generations of mentally disabled citizens did less than remain silent because they have become arms of the very corporations that profit from selling and distributing poisons. Just look who sits on the FDA’s Scientific Advisory Boards the conflicts of interest are so glaring as to suggest that the FDA has become a trade arm of Big Pharma.

Nevertheless, the hand writing is on the wall as the US government has quietly conceded a vaccine-autism case in the Court of Federal Claims [3]. Pediatricians will no longer be able to hide behind the skirts of “Standard of Care” if they are giving autistic children heavy-metal laden vaccines, or children with mitochondrial dysfunction vaccine, or when it is established most “autistic” children have mitochondrial dysfunction.

The AAP should proactively be bringing in risk management specialists to determine how this could affect pediatricians in civil litigation for following the CDC recommendations on vaccinations after a diagnosis of any type of neurodevelopmental delay in a child. Of course, this is what they are afraid of and this is what the law of attraction will bring in upon the AAP and their minions who just followed the recommendations and drank the Kool-Aid that Big Pharma wanted them to drink.

For all the above reasons, I will no longer enable the AAP to be party to the damage that is being done to the world’s chil-dren by sending in my dues for a third decade. It is a token protest, but it has to begin with someone.

References
[1] a. Jefferson T. Influenza vaccination: Policy versus evidence. BMJ 2006; 333: 912-915 (28 October), doi: 10.1136/bmj.38995.531701.80
b. Geier DA, King PG, Geier MR. Influenza Vaccine: Review of effec-tiveness of the U.S. immunization program, and policy considerations. JAPS (Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons) 2006 Fall; 11(3): 69-74
[2] http://www.ajph.org/cgi/eletters/AJPH.2007.113159v1
[3] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci _b_ 88323.html

2008 (December) MOST PATIENTS SHOULD BE SCREENED FOR H.I.V., PHYSICIANS GROUP SAYS: NEW YORK TIMES, DECEMBER 2, 2008. By RONI CARYN RABIN

The American College of Physicians is urging doctors to screen all patients for H.I.V. routinely beginning at age 13, whether or not they engage in risky behaviors.

The guidelines differ slightly from those of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which recommends routine screening of patients until age 64 unless the prevalence of H.I.V. is known to be less than 0.1 percent in the patient population. The recommendations also differ from those put forth by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, which urges routine screening only of patients at increased risk for infection.

But most patients don’t tell their doctors about their risky behaviors, said Dr. Amir Qaseem, senior medical associate with the American College of Physicians, a professional group that represents internists. Moreover, it is almost impossible for a physician to know what the H.I.V. prevalence rate is among certain patients, Dr. Qaseem added.

Right now it’s estimated 1 million to 1.2 million Americans have H.I.V., but 24 to 27 percent are undiagnosed or unaware of their infection,” Dr. Qaseem said. “We’re recommending clinicians just adopt routine screening in their patients.”

The college set no upper age limit on testing because 20 percent of people with H.I.V. are over 50 years of age, Dr. Qaseem said. He said clinicians should decide whether repeat screening is required on a case-by-case basis.

Even though the C.D.C. recommended routine testing two years ago, hospitals and clinics have been slow to incorporate H.I.V. screening into daily care. Just 50 to 100 of the nation’s 5,000 emergency rooms routinely test for H.I.V., said Dr. Richard Rothman, associate professor of emergency medicine at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, in part because of a lack of funding.

The C.D.C.’s view was that you would get an H.I.V. test just like you would have a complete blood count or any other test as part of your care,” Dr. Rothman said. “But right now in many states there is no mechanism for reimbursement, so emergency rooms that try to do it have to foot the bill themselves or find creative ways of paying for it.”

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists also recommends routine screening of all women ages 19 to 64, regardless of their risk factors for H.I.V. infection. Early diagnosis maximizes the benefit from antiretroviral therapy and may also help contain the spread of the disease by decreasing inadvertent transmissions.

2008 TOURIST VISA FROM INDIA:
Declaration to be made by applicants seeking to stay in India for more than one year:

I hereby undertake that I shall subject myself to a medical test, including for AIDS within one month of arrival in Inda. In case I am found positive for AIDS, I will leave India.”

2008 Vaccines Cause Micro-Vascular Strokes: Dr. Andrew Moulden, Canadian Doctor (September 27, 2008) http://newsblaze.com/story/20080927170755tsop.nb/topstory.html

How long does it take a medical breakthrough to be acted upon? A Canadian doctor, Dr. Andrew Moulden says he conclusively proved seven years ago that vaccines cause micro-vascular strokes. Dr Moulden has a 21 year record of award-winning medical study and practice starting at Nipissing University, but he has been unable to get the attention of the College of Physicians or politicians to investigate his findings, which have been corroborated by other doctors. How vaccines cause micro-vascular strokes – Dr. Moulden says the shots cause our body’s own immune systems to hyper-react as large white blood cells naturally rush to attack the foreign particles injected into our bloodstream. The white blood cells are too big to enter, so they surround tiny capillaries where the foreign particles land, clog and collapse the capillaries. This cuts off pathways for the smaller red blood cells to carry oxygen to the organs near those capillaries that contain the foreign particles. When the particles float near the brain, this lack of blood supply can lead to autism, SIDS and many other diagnosed illnesses in both children and adults. Our immune systems will continue fighting the particles leading to long-term or chronic illness. Different organs are affected depending on where the particles are, which leads to different symptoms and ‘disease’ names, but the basic causes are the same and before this discovery were unknown. The main cause of the problem is the additives in the vaccines. The purpose of the additives is to generate a faster response from white blood cells. This works perfectly – white blood cells rush to the site of the introduced foreign matter – and that is the source of the problem. The white blood cells block the capillaries and also collapse them, trying to destroy the foreign matter. CLIP Much more on this through http://brainguardmd.com/

2008 TUCSON, Arizona, October 2, (ENS) – New research indicates that the most pervasive global strain of HIV began spreading among humans as early as 1884, suggesting that growing urbanization in colonial Africa through the early 1900s set the stage for the current HIV/AIDS pandemic…

The virus responsible for HIV/AIDS jumped from chimpanzees to humans…

BARRE-SINOUSSI, LUC MONTAGNIER, HAROLD ZUR HAUSEN RECIEVE NOBEL PRIZE FOR “HIV” AND HPV: GALLO SAYS THEY DESERVE IT:

2008 October 6. Montagnier, Barre-Sinoussi and zur Hausen Share Nobel Physiology or medicine prize recognizes work on HIV and human papillomavirus (HPV) linked to cervical cancer–but leaves out Robert Gallo By Jordan Lite in Scientific American

A pair of French scientists who isolated the AIDS-causing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and a German scientist who determined that human papillomavirus (HPV) causes cervical cancer were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine today.

The Nobel committee’s decision to give the prize to Luc Montagnier and Francoise Barre-Sinoussi, who isolated HIV in 1983, caps a long, bitter dispute between the Pasteur Institute in Paris, where they made their discovery, and American scientist Robert Gallo, who linked HIV to AIDS separately but was snubbed by the Nobel committee.

Gallo, then a division chief at the National Cancer Institute, made the connection between HIV and AIDS in research published in 1984 in the journal Science. A year later, the Pasteur Institute sued him for allegedly using one of its samples of HIV to draw his conclusion.
In 1992 a review panel of the National Academy of Sciences determined that the sample Gallo used was contaminated with material from the Pasteur Institute, and accused him of “intellectual recklessness of a high degree.” That same year, Gallo was found guilty of scientific misconduct by the Office of Research Integrity of the U.S. Public Health Serivce.
Both determinations were overturned on appeal. Gallo and Montagnier, 76, co-authored at least two papers, one for Scientific American in 1988, and another in Science in 2002 in which they credited each other with aspects of the discovery. Today, members of the Nobel committee said the award was given to the right scientists…..

Against the prevailing view during the 1970s, Harald zur Hausen postulated a role for human papilloma virus (HPV) in cervical cancer. He assumed that the tumour cells, if they contained an oncogenic virus, should harbour viral DNA integrated into their genomes. The HPV genes promoting cell proliferation should therefore be detectable by specifically searching tumour cells for such viral DNA. Harald zur Hausen pursued this idea for over 10 years by searching for different HPV types, a search made difficult by the fact that only parts of the viral DNA were integrated into the host genome. He found novel HPV-DNA in cervix cancer biopsies, and thus discovered the new, tumourigenic HPV16 type in 1983.
However, a few opponents led by P. Duesberg argued and are still arguing that there is no real demonstration that the virus does exist and is the cause of AIDS according to Koch’s postulates.

This violates all the seroepidemiological rules of vaccination-where the presence of antibodies is indicative of immunity. Either the rules of vacciology are wrong, “HIV” doesn’t exist as an exogenous retrovirus, or the epitopes tested for in either situation are not reactive. This single fact strongly suggests that the AIDS era was necessary in order to realize that vaccines cannot possibly benefit mankind. This theme will be fully supported in the “HIV/AIDS” section of this website.

THE PROBABLE CAUSE OF “HIV” HAS BEEN FOUND BY A CHICAGO SCIENTIST…IT IS ENDOGENOUS RETROVIRUS-LIKE SEQUENCES (HERVS) OR RETROIDS (RETROELEMENTS):

The so-called template for the protein molecular signatures of “HIV” may derive from endogenous DNA sequences (coming from cellular origin instead of viral origin). These cellular proteins are expressed under certain conditions by normal uninfected yeast, insects, dogs, rhesus monkeys, chimps, and humans, and they non-specifically cause ALL “HIV” tests to react positive.”

HIV” is said to have 9150 base pairs, but again, this template has not been purified without contaminating cellular nucleic acids. So, it is likely that “HIV’s” molecular markers could represent the by-products of our cells, which were incorrectly called HERV’s (Human Endogenous RetroVirus (1) nucleic acid sequences (incorrectly called HERV’s because they have not not proven to be viruses, or to cause human disease), or more likely, what is called a ‘retroid’ of one kind or another (2). That these hypothesis are possible has been shown again and again to be likely from studies with “HERV’s” such as “the Phoenix viruses,” that are produced by infecting cells with certain sequences of DNA, which then are packaged by the cells into viral-like particles.”

Although the infectious or disease-causing abiliy of “HERV’s” or their viral nature haven’t been proven, modern analyses of the Human Genome Database reveal more than 120, 000 full-length retroids containing reverse transcriptase transcripts. It might be prudent to simply consider “HIV” markers as expression products of retroids that are now being discovered through genomic sequencing. Although the Promoters of “HIV=AIDS” are always saying the “HIV virus'” reverse transcriptase sequence is mutating when patients die on anti-retroviral drugs that supposedly target this and other “HIV-enzymes,” genomic analyses show that reverse transcriptase is among the most stable transcripts that make up these retroids, and it is the sequence stability rather than the instability or mutability of the reverse transcriptase sequence itself that make these 120,000 retroids possible to classify.”


“The vast amount of evidence shows that the probable “cause of “HIV” are retroids and/or endogenous “HERV” sequences, that can be evoked, under stress conditions, or which may become expressed in healthy persons as part of a relatively rare genetic polymorphism. The science of genomics itself raises much doubt regarding the tacit assumption and arrogance that we know all there is to know about the human genome, or under what circumstances we may express novel but perhaps steryotypic gene sequences.”


“Someday, it may indeed be firmly established that there may be a relationship between “HIV’s” molecular markers and immune disorders in some individuals who harbor a plethora of different immunological conditions or diseases, but the ten million dollar question science has not been permitted to ask about these individuals is: which comes first? Which is cause and which is effect, and what is the meaning of the presence of molecular markers of “HIV” in a healthy person who tests “HIV-positive?”


“What is perhaps also the most remarkable fact about the history of AIDS, is that reverse transcriptase was once thought by all working in AIDS research who have promoted “HIV/AIDS,” to be specific to retroviruses, and this is the enzyme they first measured, and indeed some labs continue to measure, as evidence of “HIV infection.” However we are all made up partly of retroviral components, they are part of us. They are most accurately referred to as retroids. What they call “HIV” and what they have successfully branded as the most dangerous and infectious virus known to man that is said to confer a near 100% mortality rate like the Andromeda Strain of Hollywood “if not treated with life-saving AIDS drugs,” is simply expressed, or can be evoked in many of us, because it is made by our cells, and the expression of these markers can be submerged with ARV’s. The Promoters of “HIV/AIDS” have mistaken 237 endogenous normal cellular proteins for a “virus” for more than two decades now, the flawed technologies for detecting these markers have never been disclosed to the public, and without any of the sober analysis of what those tests are actually detecting or what “HIV’s” molecular signature means for a human being, millions of lives will continue to be ruined.”


“Other so-called “HIV-specific” sequences, such as those that give rise to the so-called GAG, PR, RT, ENV molecules are also found in the normal Human genome database. In gene bank searches, one can find 16 samples of spuma virus transcripts, 6 examples of snakehead virus, 16 samples of FIV (feline immune deficiency virus), 60 examples of detecting one or more HBV (hepatitis B virus) genes, and at least 11 cases of “HIV” sequences that are said to be scattered throughout the normal Human genome, according to the analyses of McClure and other Human Genome Database analysts.”


“Although Dr. Gallo and others have claimed that in a stadium full of “HIV-negative” people, not one molecule of “HIV” will be present, the DAIDS (Division of AIDS) culturing manual says that if “HIV-infected” cells from human blood express more than 30 units of “HIV-specific” p24 protein on 2 or 3 separate tests (30 pg/ml), one is considered “HIV-positive,” and if one sleeps with somebody without telling them they have these 30 or more units, one can be tried for attempted murder, one can’t obtain health insurance, one might be fired from his or her job, one might commit suicide, if pregnant one may be frightened into aborting her baby. If your cells express less than 30 units of this protein 2 or 3 separate times (pg/ml), then one is considered non-“HIV-infected” and is home free-one can donate blood, sleep with anyone he or she wants, without telling them his or her “less than 30 status,” etc. How could this be possible if there isn’t one molecule of “HIV” in a stadium full of “HIV-negative” people? Its an arbitrary measurement of a molecular signature that may have nothing to do with a virus or immune suppression that is arbitrarily being measured at more than 30 units for an “infected” person, and less than 30 units for a non-infected person.”


“P24, by the way, which supposedly is an essential “HIV” protein, is also found in the thymus gland cells of non-infected “HIV-negative” children.”
“The confusing thing may be that some of these endogenous cellular DNA or RNA sequences are only expressed rarely, or in response to physiological stresses: they aren’t infectious, and they may represent as much a 8% of the normal human genome according to some scientists.”


“HIV’s” molecular signature has nothing to do with a specific exogenous virus: the molecular signature thought to be a virus may in fact be generated also in response to previously latent real viruses that at some point of physiological stress provokes a new and complex immune response, which is read as “HIV’s molecular signature. The immune system of a person so infected by multiple or numerous latent real viral infections could be perpetually generating new immunogens, which is read by AIDS scientists as an ever changing and mutating “HIV.” In theory, such an immune chain reaction caused by multiple real viral or bacterial or fungal infections would be progressively more debilitating for the stability and effectiveness of immune function, and, a vaccine against any specific virus or other pathogen would be ineffective against the development of AIDS. If this hypothesis is correct, then an experimental animal model of AIDS should be induced in laboratory animals by infecting them at a low multiplicity with a very large number of diverse viruses, as was suggested one by Nobelist, and PCR-inventor, Kary Mullis, in a Genetica paper he wrote in 1995. The allo-immunization hypothesis of Root-Bernstein and the oxidation hypothesis of the Perth group also deserve careful investigation.”


“What is the probable cause of “HIV?” In the scientific community, there is increasing interest in how “HERV’s” may serve normal cellular functions like trophoblast fusion, and also how they may function in disease states. For example, reviews of this subject typically present information that equates so-called “viral” sequences to Human endogenous retroviral sequences as can be seen in references such as (3).”

Human endogenous retroviruses (HERVs) have a similar structure to the proviruses of infectious retroviruses but typically contain many inactivating mutations including point mutations (dark bands), frameshifts and deletions (particularly in env). Frequently, the entire central portion has been lost by homologous recombination, leaving behind a ‘solitary LTR’. Although almost all HERVs are defective, the LTRs may still be active, and transcription of HERVs is common particularly in fetal tissue and in inflammatory disease and cancer. In a few cases, coding competence has been retained for env even when adjacent viral genes are heavily mutated, suggesting that selective pressures have maintained these open reading frames because they serve a cellular function.”

HERs and disease (Human Endgogenous “Retroviral” sequences):

HERs have frequently been proposed as etiological cofactors in chronic diseases such as cancer, autoimmunity and neurological disease [13]. Unfortunately, despite intense effort from many groups, there remains little direct evidence to support these claims, and moreover some studies have served only to muddy the waters for others. One particular difficulty has been picking out the coding-competent subset of HERs from the large background ‘noise’ of defective elements. The clinical heterogeneity of many of the associated diseases, such as lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis, has also been a problem, since HERs may be involved in specific subtypes of a particular disease and such subtypes may not be recognized by current diagnostic criteria. The availability of the human genome sequence will facilitate the identification of those HER’s loci most likely to be involved in disease. In addition, a deeper understanding of the genetic basis of these diseases should lead to a more precise definition of disease subtypes. In turn, this may clarify the part played by HERs.”

Much of the evidence that links HERs to disease comes from the detection of expressed retroviral sequences in patient tissue by degenerately primed PCR. For example, HERV-W was first identified in a search for retroviruses in people with multiple sclerosis [14], and the same HERV was recently detected in both cerebrospinal fluid and brain tissue from patients with schizophrenia [15]. The significance of HERV RNA expression in studies such as these remains unclear, because disease causation cannot be proved simply by the detection of virus expression, particularly for a ubiquitous sequence such as a HERV. In addition, although HERV RNA expression is known to be increased in several autoimmune diseases and cancers, there is usually activation of a range of class I and class II HERVs rather than expression of a single provirus. In general, further validation of disease association for HERVs has not been described. An exception is the HERV-K(HML-2) subgroup, which has been implicated in germ-cell tumors. As noted above, this subgroup includes the youngest and most active HERVs, and specific attention has focused on the ability of these elements to form virus-like particles in teratocarcinoma-derived cell lines [16]. Some of these particles are able to bud from the cell surface, although it is doubtful whether they are infectious. In addition, patients with germ-cell tumors frequently have antibodies to HERV-K Gag and Env proteins [17]. Recent work has shown that a regulatory protein produced by HERV-K(HML-2) can bind the transcription factor PLZF (promyelocytic leukemia zinc finger protein), which is required for spermatogenesis [18]. Impairment of spermatogenesis is associated with increased frequency of germ-cell tumors, and thus perturbation of PLZF function could provide a mechanism for the involvement of HERV-K in tumorigenesis.”

Clearly, many questions remain. Are HERV-K particles produced from a single intact provirus or does trans-complementation of proteins from several loci lead to the production of composite particles? Are any of these particles infectious and do they contribute to tumor formation? The human genome sequence may be able to help to address these issues by identifying those copies of HERV-K(HML-2) that are most likely to contribute to particle production. Comparison of these loci between patients with germ-cell tumors and controls may then reveal differences which could be the focus of further research.

1. Marie Dewannieux, Francis Harper Aurelien Richaud, Claire Letzelter, David Ribet, Gerard Pierron, Thierry Heidmann. Identification of infectious progenitor for the multiple-copy HERV-K human endotheous retroelements. Genome Res. Oct 31, 2006.
2. Marcella A. McClure, Hugh S. Richardson, Rochelle A. Clinton, Crystal M. Hepp, Brad A. Crowther, Eric F. Donaldson. Automated characterization of potentially active retroid agents in the human genome. Genomics 512-523, 2005.
3. David J Griffiths. Endogenous retroviruses in the human genome sequence. Genome Biology 2001, 2:reviews1017.1-1017.5doi:10.1186/gb-2001-2-6-reviews1017 http://genomebiology.com/2001/2/6/reviews/1017

HIV” “VIRAL LOAD” OR CD4-DEPLETION NO LONGER CAUSES AIDS:
LYMPH NODE FIBROSIS CAUSES AIDS.

2009 THE PUZZLE OF CD4-CELL DEPLETION DESPITE GOOD VIRAL SUPPRESSION:
Abigail Zuger, MD

Published in AIDS Clinical Care June 1, 2009
In some patients, CD4-cell counts fail to rise as expected. Could extensive lymph node fibrosis be responsible?

We expect that when combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) suppresses a patient’s HIV viremia [dampens retroid production], a steady increase in CD4-cell count will ensue. In some patients, however, such increases are minimal or fail to occur, and in others, CD4-cell counts plummet after an initial rise, even though viral load [retroid expression] remains undetectable. The combination of ddI and tenofovir has been associated with these aberrant CD4-cell responses, but the underlying mechanism is unclear, and the phenomenon is also seen in patients taking other drugs.
In a recent study, NIH researchers sought evidence to support any of several hypothetical explanations for the aberrant CD4-cell responses seen in four patients on combination ART whose CD4 counts had fallen from a median of 719 cells/mm3 to a median of 227 cells/mm3 despite persistently undetectable plasma viral loads [retroids] . Three of the four patients were receiving a regimen containing tenofovir and ddI.

Residual replicating HIV did not seem to be the problem: Results of ultrasensitive PCR and assays for peripheral blood mononuclear cell–associated HIV RNA and proviral HIV DNA — and of assays for cell-associated HIV RNA and proviral DNA in mononuclear cells from inguinal lymph nodes — were similar to those obtained in other, successfully treated patients. No evidence of occult drug resistance sabotaging treatment was found. Changing ART regimens to avoid the tenofovir/ddI combination had little effect on CD4-cell counts during the follow-up period (median duration, 10 months).

The single unusual finding was a striking abnormality in inguinal lymph node architecture in the four patients: From 24% to 34% of the T-cell zone was replaced by collagen. In contrast, collagen levels in six successfully treated patients have been reported to range from 2% to 12% (J Clin Invest 2002; 110:1133).

Comment: We do not know the exact pathogenesis of CD4-cell depletion in untreated HIV infection, so creating logical hypotheses to explain aberrant CD4 responses is especially challenging. These authors offer the intriguing suggestion that the unusual lymph node architecture documented in all four patients in this study may be related to (or even responsible for) the inadequate CD4-cell response — i.e., that CD4-cell depletion is independent of specific components of an antiretroviral regimen and is instead caused by lymph node fibrosis. They note that such architectural damage may well be “clinically irreversible with currently available interventions.”

Citation(s):
Nies-Kraske E et al. Evaluation of the pathogenesis of decreasing CD4+ T cell counts in human immunodeficiency virus type 1–infected patients receiving successfully suppressive antiretroviral therapy. J Infect Dis 2009 Jun 1; 199:1648.)

2009 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090519172045.htm
ScienceDaily. American Thoracic Society (2009, May 20).

Children Who Get Flu Vaccine Have Three Times Risk Of Hospitalization For Flu, Study Suggests.

The inactivated flu vaccine does not appear to be effective in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations in children, especially the ones with asthma. In fact, children who get the flu vaccine are more at risk for hospitalization than their peers who do not get the vaccine, according tonew research that will be presented on May 19, at the 105th International Conference of the American Thoracic Society in San Diego.”

Flu vaccine (trivalent inactivated flu vaccine-TIV) has unknown effects on asthmatics.”

“The concerns that vaccination maybe associated with asthma exacerbations have been disproved with multiple studies in the past, but the vaccine’s effectiveness has not been well-established,” said Avni Joshi, M.D., of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. “This study was aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of the TIV in children overall, as well as the children with asthma, to prevent influenza-related hospitalization.”

The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommend annual influenza vaccination for all children aged six months to 18 years. The National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (3rd revision) also recommends annual flu vaccination of asthmatic children older than six months.”

In order to determine whether the vaccine was effective in reducing the number of hospitalizations that all children, and especially the ones with asthma, faced over eight consecutive flu seasons, the researchers conducted a cohort study of 263 children who were evaluated at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota from six months to 18 years of age, each of whom had had laboratory-confirmed influenza between 1996 to 2006. The investigators determined who had and had not received the flu vaccine, their asthma status and who did and did not require hospitalization. Records were reviewed for each subject with influenza-related illness for flu vaccination preceding the illness and hospitalization during that illness.”

They found that children who had received the flu vaccine had three times the risk of hospitalization, as compared to children who had not received the vaccine. In asthmatic children, there was a significantly higher risk of hospitalization in subjects who received the TIV, as compared to those who did not (p= 0.006). But no other measured factors-such as insurance plans or severity of asthma-appeared to affect risk of hospitalization.”

“While these findings do raise questions about the efficacy of the vaccine, they do not in fact implicate it as a cause of hospitalizations,” said Dr. Joshi. “More studies are needed to assess not only the immunogenicity, but also the efficacy of different influenza vaccines in asthmatic subjects.” Adapted from materials provided by American Thoracic Society, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

2009 March 2nd
http://www.dogsadversereactions.com/scienceVaccineDamage.html

Science of Vaccine Damage

by Catherine O’Driscoll

A team at Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine conducted several studies (1,2) to determine if vaccines can cause changes in the immune system of dogs that might lead to life-threatening immune-mediated diseases. They obviously conducted this research because concern already existed. It was sponsored by the Haywood Foundation which itself was looking for evidence that such changes in the human immune system might also be vaccine induced. It found the evidence.

The vaccinated, but not the non-vaccinated, dogs in the Purdue studies developed autoantibodies to many of their own biochemicals, including fibronectin, laminin, DNA, albumin, cytochrome C, cardiolipin and collagen.

This means that the vaccinated dogs — ”but not the non-vaccinated dogs”– were attacking their own fibronectin, which is involved in tissue repair, cell multiplication and growth, and differentiation between tissues and organs in a living organism.

The vaccinated Purdue dogs also developed autoantibodies to laminin, which is involved in many cellular activities including the adhesion, spreading, differentiation, proliferation and movement of cells. Vaccines thus appear to be capable of removing the natural intelligence of cells.

Autoantibodies to cardiolipin are frequently found in patients with the serious disease systemic lupus erythematosus and also in individuals with other autoimmune diseases. The presence of elevated anti-cardiolipin antibodies is significantly associated with clots within the heart or blood vessels, in poor blood clotting, haemorrhage, bleeding into the skin, foetal loss and neurological conditions.

The Purdue studies also found that vaccinated dogs were developing autoantibodies to their own collagen. About one quarter of all the protein in the body is collagen. Collagen provides structure to our bodies, protecting and supporting the softer tissues and connecting them with the skeleton. It is no wonder that Canine Health Concern’s 1997 study of 4,000 dogs showed a high number of dogs developing mobility problems shortly after they were vaccinated (noted in my 1997 book, What Vets Don’t Tell You About Vaccines).

Perhaps most worryingly, the Purdue studies found that the vaccinated dogs had developed autoantibodies to their own DNA. Did the alarm bells sound? Did the scientific community call a halt to the vaccination program? No. Instead, they stuck their fingers in the air, saying more research is needed to ascertain whether vaccines can cause genetic damage. Meanwhile, the study dogs were found good homes, but no long-term follow-up has been conducted. At around the same time, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force initiated several studies to find out why 160,000 cats each year in the USA develop terminal cancer at their vaccine injection sites.(3) The fact that cats can get vaccine-induced cancer has been acknowledged by veterinary bodies around the world, and even the British Government acknowledged it through its Working Group charged with the task of looking into canine and feline vaccines(4) following pressure from Canine Health Concern. What do you imagine was the advice of the AVMA Task Force, veterinary bodies and governments? “Carry on vaccinating until we find out why vaccines are killing cats, and which cats are most likely to die.”

In America, in an attempt to mitigate the problem, they’re vaccinating cats in the tail or leg so they can amputate when cancer appears. Great advice if it’s not your cat amongst the hundreds of thousands on the “oops” list.

But other species are okay – right? Wrong. In August 2003, the Journal of Veterinary Medicine carried an Italian study which showed that dogs also develop vaccine-induced cancers at their injection sites.(5) We already know that vaccine-site cancer is a possible sequel to human vaccines, too, since the Salk polio vaccine was said to carry a monkey retrovirus (from cultivating the vaccine on monkey organs) that produces inheritable cancer. The monkey retrovirus SV40 keeps turning up in human cancer sites.

It is also widely acknowledged that vaccines can cause a fast-acting, usually fatal, disease called autoimmune haemolytic anaemia (AIHA). Without treatment, and frequently with treatment, individuals can die in agony within a matter of days. Merck, itself a multinational vaccine manufacturer, states in The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy that autoimmune haemolytic anaemia may be caused by modified live-virus vaccines, as do Tizard’s Veterinary Immunology (4th edition) and the Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine.(6) The British Government’s Working Group, despite being staffed by vaccine-industry consultants who say they are independent, also acknowledged this fact. However, no one warns the pet owners before their animals are subjected to an unnecessary booster, and very few owners are told why after their pets die of AIHA.

A Wide Range of Vaccine-induced Diseases

We also found some worrying correlations between vaccine events and the onset of arthritis in our 1997 survey. Our concerns were compounded by research in the human field.

The New England Journal of Medicine, for example, reported that it is possible to isolate the rubella virus from affected joints in children vaccinated against rubella. It also told of the isolation of viruses from the peripheral blood of women with prolonged arthritis following vaccination.(7)

Then, in 2000, CHC’s findings were confirmed by research which showed that polyarthritis and other diseases like amyloidosis, which affects organs in dogs, were linked to the combined vaccine given to dogs.(8) There is a huge body of research, despite the paucity of funding from the vaccine industry, to confirm that vaccines can cause a wide range of brain and central nervous system damage. Merck itself states in its Manual that vaccines (i.e., its own products) can cause encephalitis: brain inflammation/damage. In some cases, encephalitis involves lesions in the brain and throughout the central nervous system. Merck states that “examples are the encephalitides following measles, chickenpox, rubella, smallpox vaccination, vaccinia, and many other less well defined viral infections”.

When the dog owners who took part in the CHC survey reported that their dogs developed short attention spans, 73.1% of the dogs did so within three months of a vaccine event. The same percentage of dogs was diagnosed with epilepsy within three months of a shot (but usually within days). We also found that 72.5% of dogs that were considered by their owners to be nervous and of a worrying disposition, first exhibited these traits within the three-month post-vaccination period.

I would like to add for the sake of Oliver, my friend who suffered from paralyzed rear legs and death shortly after a vaccine shot, that “paresis” is listed in Merck’s Manual as a symptom of encephalitis. This is defined as muscular weakness of a neural (brain) origin which involves partial or incomplete paralysis, resulting from lesions at any level of the descending pathway from the brain. Hind limb paralysis is one of the potential consequences. Encephalitis, incidentally, is a disease that can manifest across the scale from mild to severe and can also cause sudden death.

Organ failure must also be suspected when it occurs shortly after a vaccine event. Dr Larry Glickman, who spearheaded the Purdue research into post-vaccination biochemical changes in dogs, wrote in a letter to Cavalier Spaniel breeder Bet Hargreaves:

“Our ongoing studies of dogs show that following routine vaccination, there is a significant rise in the level of antibodies dogs produce against their own tissues. Some of these antibodies have been shown to target the thyroid gland, connective tissue such as that found in the valves of the heart, red blood cells, DNA, etc. I do believe that the heart conditions in Cavalier King Charles Spaniels could be the end result of repeated immunizations by vaccines containing tissue culture contaminants that cause a progressive immune response directed at connective tissue in the heart valves. The clinical manifestations would be more pronounced in dogs that have a genetic predisposition [although] the findings should be generally applicable to all dogs regardless of their breed.”

I must mention here that Dr Glickman believes that vaccines are a necessary evil, but that safer vaccines need to be developed.

Vaccines Stimulate an Inflammatory Response

The word “allergy” is synonymous with “sensitivity” and “inflammation”. It should, by rights, also be synonymous with the word “vaccination”. This is what vaccines do: they sensitise (render allergic)an individual in the process of forcing them to develop antibodies to fight a disease threat. In other words, as is acknowledged and accepted, as part of the vaccine process the body will respond with inflammation. This may be apparently temporary or it may be longstanding.

Holistic doctors and veterinarians have known this for at least 100 years. They talk about a wide range of inflammatory or “-itis” diseases which arise shortly after a vaccine event. Vaccines, in fact, plunge many individuals into an allergic state. Again, this is a disorder that ranges from mild all the way through to the suddenly fatal. Anaphylactic shock is the culmination: it’s where an individual has a massive allergic reaction to a vaccine and will die within minutes if adrenaline or its equivalent is not administered.

There are some individuals who are genetically not well placed to withstand the vaccine challenge. These are the people (and animals are “people”, too) who have inherited faulty B and T cell function. B and T cells are components within the immune system which identify foreign invaders and destroy them, and hold the invader in memory so that they cannot cause future harm. However, where inflammatory responses are concerned, the immune system overreacts and causes unwanted effects such as allergies and other inflammatory conditions.

Merck warns in its Manual that patients with, or from families with, B and/or T cell immunodeficiencies should not receive live-virus vaccines due to the risk of severe or fatal infection. Elsewhere, it lists features of B and T cell immunodeficiencies as food allergies, inhalant allergies, eczema, dermatitis, neurological deterioration and heart disease. To translate, people with these conditions can die if they receive live-virus vaccines. Their immune systems are simply not competent enough to guarantee a healthy reaction to the viral assault from modified live-virus vaccines.

Modified live-virus (MLV) vaccines replicate in the patient until an immune response is provoked. If a defence isn’t stimulated, then the vaccine continues to replicate until it gives the patient the very disease it was intending to prevent.

Alternatively, a deranged immune response will lead to inflammatory conditions such as arthritis, pancreatitis, colitis, encephalitis and any number of autoimmune diseases such as cancer and leukaemia, where the body attacks its own cells.

A new theory, stumbled upon by Open University student Gary Smith, explains what holistic practitioners have been saying for a very long time. Here is what a few of the holistic vets have said in relation to their patients:

Dr Jean Dodds: “Many veterinarians trace the present problems with allergic and immunologic diseases to the introduction of MLV vaccines…” (9)

Christina Chambreau, DVM: “Routine vaccinations are probably the worst thing that we do for our animals. They cause all types of illnesses, but not directly to where we would relate them definitely to be caused by the vaccine.” (10)


Martin Goldstein, DVM: “I think that vaccines…are leading killers of dogs and cats in America today.”
Dr Charles E. Loops, DVM: “Homoeopathic veterinarians and other holistic practitioners have maintained for some time that vaccinations do more harm than they provide benefits.” (12)
Mike Kohn, DVM: “In response to this [vaccine] violation, there have been increased autoimmune diseases (allergies being one component), epilepsy, neoplasia [tumours], as well as behavioural problems in small animals.” (13)

A Theory on Inflammation

Gary Smith explains what observant healthcare practitioners have been saying for a very long time, but perhaps they’ve not understood why their observations led them to say it. His theory, incidentally, is causing a huge stir within the inner scientific sanctum. Some believe that his theory could lead to a cure for many diseases including cancer. For me, it explains why the vaccine process is inherently questionable.

Gary was learning about inflammation as part of his studies when he struck upon a theory so extraordinary that it could have implications for the treatment of almost every inflammatory disease — including Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, rheumatoid arthritis and even HIV and AIDS.

Gary’s theory questions the received wisdom that when a person gets ill, the inflammation that occurs around the infected area helps it to heal. He claims that, in reality, inflammation prevents the body from recognising a foreign substance and therefore serves as a hiding place for invaders. The inflammation occurs when at-risk cells produce receptors called All (known as angiotensin II type I receptors). He says that while At1 has a balancing receptor, At2, which is supposed to switch off the inflammation, in most diseases this does not happen.

“Cancer has been described as the wound that never heals,” he says. “All successful cancers are surrounded by inflammation. Commonly this is thought to be the body’s reaction to try to fight the cancer, but this is not the case.

“The inflammation is not the body trying to fight the infection. It is actually the virus or bacteria deliberately causing inflammation in order to hide from the immune system [author’s emphasis].” (14)

If Gary is right, then the inflammatory process so commonly stimulated by vaccines is not, as hitherto assumed, a necessarily acceptable sign. Instead, it could be a sign that the viral or bacterial component, or the adjuvant (which, containing foreign protein, is seen as an invader by the immune system), in the vaccine is winning by stealth.

If Gary is correct in believing that the inflammatory response is not protective but a sign that invasion is taking place under cover of darkness, vaccines are certainly not the friends we thought they were. They are undercover assassins working on behalf of the enemy, and vets and medical doctors are unwittingly acting as collaborators. Worse, we animal guardians and parents are actually paying doctors and vets to unwittingly betray our loved ones.

Potentially, vaccines are the stealth bomb of the medical world. They are used to catapult invaders inside the castle walls where they can wreak havoc, with none of us any the wiser. So rather than experiencing frank viral diseases such as the ‘flu, measles, mumps and rubella (and, in the case of dogs, parvovirus and distemper), we are allowing the viruses to win anyway – but with cancer, leukaemia and other inflammatory or autoimmune (self-attacking) diseases taking their place.

The Final Insult

All 27 veterinary schools in North America have changed their protocols for vaccinating dogs and cats along the following lines; (15) however, vets in practice are reluctant to listen to these changed protocols and official veterinary bodies in the UK and other countries are ignoring the following facts.

Dogs’ and cats’ immune systems mature fully at six months. If modified live-virus vaccine is giver after six months of age, it produces immunity, which is good for the life of the pet. If another MLV vaccine is given a year later, the antibodies from the first vaccine neutralise the antigens of the second vaccine and there is little or no effect. The litre is no “boosted”, nor are more memory cells induced.

Not only are annual boosters unnecessary, but they subject the pet to potential risks such as allergic reactions and immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia.

In plain language, veterinary schools in America, plus the American Veterinary Medical Association, have looked at studies to show how long vaccines last and they have concluded and announced that annual vaccination is unnecessary.(16-19)

Further, they have acknowledged that vaccines are not without harm. Dr Ron Schultz, head of pathobiology at Wisconsin University and a leading light in this field, has been saying this politely to his veterinary colleagues since the 1980s. I’ve been saying it for the past 12 years. But change is so long in coming and, in the meantime, hundreds of thousands of animals are dying every year – unnecessarily.

The good news is that thousands of animal lovers (but not enough) have heard what we’ve been saying. Canine Health Concern members around the world use real food as Nature’s supreme disease preventative, eschewing processed pet food, and minimize the vaccine risk. Some of us, myself included, have chosen not to vaccinate our pets at all. Our reward is healthy and long-lived dogs.

It has taken but one paragraph to tell you the good and simple news. The gratitude I feel each day, when I embrace my healthy dogs, stretches from the centre of the Earth to the Universe and beyond.

About the Author:

Catherine O’Driscoll runs Canine Health Concern which campaigns and also delivers an educational program, the Foundation in Canine Healthcare. She is author of Shock to the System (2005; see review this issue), the best-selling book What Vets Don’t Tell You About Vaccines (1997, 1998), and Who Killed the Darling Buds of May? (1997; reviewed in NEXUS 4/04).

She lives in Scotland with her partner, Rob Ellis, and three Golden Retrievers, named Edward, Daniel and Gwinnie, and she lectures on canine health around the world.

For more information, contact Catherine O’Driscoll at Canine Health Concern, PO Box 7533, Perth PH2 1AD, Scotland, UK, email catherine@carsegray.co.uk , website http://www.canine-health-concern.org.uk.

Shock to the System is available in the UK from CHC, and worldwide from Dogwise at http://www.dogwise.com.

Endnotes for Cathrine O’Driscoll’s work:
1.”Effects of Vaccination on the Endocrine and Immune Systems of Dogs, Phase II”, Purdue University, November 1,1999, at http://www.homestead.com/vonhapsburg/haywardstudyonvaccines.html. 2. See http://www.vet.purdue.edu/epi/gdhstudy.htm.
3. See http://www.avma.org/vafstf/default.asp.
4. Veterinary Products Committee (VPC) Working Group on Feline and Canine Vaccination, DEFRA, May 2001.
5. JVM Series A 50(6):286-291, August 2003.
6.Duval, D. and Giger,U. (1996). “Vaccine-Associated Immune-Mediated Hemolytic Anemia in the Dog”, Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 10:290-295.
7. New England Journal of Medicine, vol.313,1985. See also Clin Exp Rheumatol 20(6):767-71, Nov-Dec 2002.
8. Am Coll Vet Intern Med 14:381,2000.
9. Dodds, Jean W.,DVM, “Immune System and Disease Resistance”, at http://www.critterchat.net/immune.htm.
10. Wolf Clan magazine, April/May 1995
11.Goldstein, Martin, The Nature of Animal Healing, Borzoi/Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1999.
12.Wolf Clan magazine, op. Cit.
13. ibid.
14. Inflammation 1:3,2004, at http://www.journal-inflammation.com content/1/1/3.
15.Klingborg, D.J., Hustead, D.R. and Curry-Galvin, E. et al., “AVMA Council on Biologic and Therapeutic Agents’ report on cat and dog vaccines”, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 221(10):1401-1407, November 15,2002,
http://www.avma.org/policies/vaccination.htm.
16.ibid.
17. Schultz, R.D., “Current and future canine and feline vaccination programs”, Vet Med 93:233-254,1998.
18. Schultz, R.D., Ford, R.B., Olsen, J. and Scott, P., “Titer testing and vaccination: a new look at traditional practices”, Vet Med 97:1-13, 2002 (insert).
19. Twark, L. and Dodds, W.J., “Clinical application of serum parvovirus and distemper virus antibody liters for determining revaccination strategies in healthy dogs”, J Am Vet Med Assoc 217:1021-1024, 2000.

2009 (June) By Navy Lt. Jennifer Cragg. U.S. Army scientists are studying a new DNA vaccine-delivery method that is needle-free and painless, said a senior Army research scientist at Fort Detrick, Md.

One of the newest DNA vaccine-delivery methods relies on technology known as the “gene gun,” which is capable of delivering the vaccine directly into cells. This needle-free vaccination method is more cost-effective, and it’s less painful for the recipient.

DNA offers a number of advantages over conventional vaccine approaches, especially with regard to biodefense vaccines. This is important when rapid vaccine development is needed for a newly emerging disease threat or possibly for a genetically engineered biological warfare pathogen,” Dr. Connie Schmaljohn, senior research scientist at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) told “Armed with Science: Research and Applications for the Modern Military” listeners during a live audio webcast on May 27.

USAMRIID is currently conducting a human study of DNA vaccines using this delivery method. Schmaljohn’s research team has isolated small amounts of DNA from the Hantaan and Puumala viruses to develop the vaccines. These particular viruses are known health threats to U.S. troops stationed in Europe and Asia. Both vaccines are now in Phase I clinical testing, the first step toward licensure by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The DNA is first coated onto very, very tiny gold beads, and those gold beads with the DNA are then put inside of a plastic device that’s about the size of a small flashlight. Inside that device is also a little canister of compressed helium gas,” Schmaljohn explained. “When the trigger of the gene gun device is pushed, the gas is released and it propels the gold [bead] coated with the DNA out of the device [and] into the skin of the vaccine recipient.”

USAMRIID is producing a DNA vaccine for the Asian and European hantaviruses that can cause hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome. This disease was first recognized as a threat during the Korean War.

The hantaviruses, once they infect humans, can cause one of two serious human illnesses – hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome, which occurs in Asia and Europe — or hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, which occurs in the Americas,” Schmaljohn said. “Today there’s more than 100,000 cases of hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome each year, with the highest number occurring in China, Russia…Scandinavia and other parts of Europe.”

These viruses are found in many types of rodents, including rats, field mice, and meadow voles.

2009 HOW DID MY DAUGHTER, 10, GET HIV?
ASIAONE / HEALTH / NEWS / STORY
Sun, Aug 23, 2009 The New Straits Times

JOHOR BARU, Malaysia: A 39-year-old single mother is puzzled how her daughter was born with the humanimmuno-deficiency virus (HIV) although the rest of her family have tested negative for the virus.

The girl, who is now 10, had been in and out of hospitals for the past eight years due to frequent bouts of lethargy and difficulty in swallowing food. Blood tests had been regularly done on her daughter. “But it was only late last year that a doctor told me that she was HIV-positive.

“This came as a shock to me,” the mother said at her home in Bukit Mutiara yesterday.

Worse, she was told that her daughter, the second of three children, had only six months to live.

“Although I am heartbroken knowing that she is suffering, I have vowed to make this Ramadan and Hari Raya Aidilfitri something for her to remember and be proud of,” said the woman tearfully.

But how did her daughter contract the virus in the first place?

The woman said blood tests had been carried out among her two other children and her former husband.

“The blood tests were all negative. “So where did my daughter get the virus from?”

“Moreover, she is suspected to have contracted the virus from the time she was born. Even the doctors could not give proper answers to my queries,” she said.

Recounting the events that led to the diagnosis of her daughter’s condition, the woman said she had first taken her daughter to a specialist hospital to find out why she was always lethargic and had trouble eating.

“But the hospital could not determine my daughter’s ailment,” she said.

“It was only after going for another treatment at another private hospital that I was told the bad news.

“I am very upset to know that after eight years of frequenting hospitals, it was only last year that my daughter’s actual condition was diagnosed.

“The doctors carried out tests for other diseases such as chikungunya and dengue, but the tests were all found to be negative.

“If I remember correctly, no blood transfusion took place during my delivery. So how could she have been infected at birth?”

Puteri Wangsa state assemblyman Datuk Abdul Halim Suleiman visited the family and handed over some cash assistance for Ramadan.

The woman, who is a clerk, said her daughter still attended morning school regularly but had quit religious school in the evening since she was too tired.

“I hope there is someone out there who can help me find out the cause of my daughter’s infection,” she said.

The girl is now on free medication supplied by a government hospital. –NST

2009 (June 11) New report forcasts more than doubling of vaccine sales by 2013.
NEW YORK, NY, Jun 11, 2009 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) — 2008 was another stellar year for the world vaccine market. Sales grew 21.5% since 2007 to reach $19.2 billion. Few areas of pharmaceuticals have seen the fast-moving developments in the marketplace that the vaccine market has. A new report from leading life science market research publisher Kalorama Information, “Vaccines 2009: World Market Analysis, Key Players, and Critical Trends in a Fast-Changing Industry,” forecasts the market to more than double by 2013 due to a strong pipeline of new products and rising usage of current products around the world.


“New products and better-than-expected profits, as well as merger activity, have transformed the vaccine marketplace,” says Bruce Carlson, publisher of Kalorama Information. “Continued sales of influenza and cervical cancer vaccines have provided a foundation for growth in the adult market. Meanwhile, the pediatric market was fueled by several major products including Wyeth’s pneumococcal vaccines Prevnar and Merck’s new rotavirus vaccine TotaTeq.”
Though vaccination programs typically focus on children, adults in industrialized countries are more likely than children to die as a result of vaccine-preventable diseases. For example, vaccines can prevent about 50% of deaths from pneumococcal disease and 80% of deaths from influenza-related complications in the elderly.


Immunization rates for these diseases continue to be low in at-risk populations, but increased educational efforts aiming to promote the benefits of immunization should contribute to continued growth.


Growth is also being fueled by vaccines that have recently been introduced or are in the approval process that address meningitis, swine flu, malaria, and Japanese encephalitis, as well as a growing number of combination vaccines which are enjoying one of the highest growth rates of any vaccine segment. Both Sanofi Pasteur’s Penacel, which protects against pertussis, diphtheria, tetanus, polio and Haemophilus influenzae type B, and GlaxoSmithKline’s Kimrix, which protects against pertussis, diphtheria, tetanus and polio, were approved by the FDA in mid-2008.


Kalorama Information’s new report, “Vaccines 2009: World Market Analysis, Key Players, and Critical Trends in a Fast-Changing Industry,” covers all the latest trends and issues for both pediatric and adult vaccines. Market data is broken down by type of vaccine, and includes market size and forecasts, product reviews and pipelines, and competitive analyses of leading providers.


(Note:It should not escape the notice of the reader that Kowasaki disease has been added to rotovirus package inserts (Kawasaki’s disease doesn’t have a diagnosis: it is akin to vascular inflammation or what is termed “vasculitis,” causes heart attacks, rheumatic fever, vascular diseases of all kinds, and profound morbidity. It is consistent with inflammation and desquamation of endothelial cells along the vasculature and it is fatal in many cases. It is significant that it does appear on the vaccine damage part of rotovirus package inserts as of 2009 at least).


For further information visit: http://www.kaloramainformation.com/redirect.asp?progid=70254&productid=2155319.


2009 In times of crisis, Big Pharma turns to vaccines Novavax shares skyrocket on new vax pact

By John Carroll.


Shares of Rockville, MA-based Novavax shot up more than 30 percent on Tuesday afternoon after the developer announced a licensing deal covering its use of virus-like particles in new vaccines.
Spain’s Rovi Pharmaceuticals Laboratories plans to use Novavax’s technology to develop exclusive new seasonal and pandemic vaccines for Spain and Portugal. Rovi also gets a non-exclusive license for Europe, Latin America and Africa. And Rovi is making a $3 million equity investment in Novavax in the partnership deal.


A non-profit foundation, jointly sponsored by ROVI and the Spanish authorities, will be formed and funded with a 25 million euro credit line from the Spanish government to support Phase III clinical development and other studies necessary to achieve marketing authorization of the VLP influenza vaccines in the European Union in 2012.


The deal represents a coup for Novavax, which has been looking to partner up as a way to gain new capital. “We continue to discuss opportunities with other pharmaceutical companies and governments to implement this compelling influenza vaccine technology around the globe,” CEO Rahul Singhvi says.


2009 (June 5) Novavax shares soar on NIH swine flu agreement. By Calisha Myers
Novavax saw its stock soar 75 percent to a high of $3.26 yesterday after the Rockville, MD-based company announced it will be working with the National Institutes of Health to evaluate its first batch of H1N1 vaccine. The vaccine developer says it completed its first batch of H1N1 virus-like particles back in May, just three weeks after the CDC released the genetic sequence of the H1N1 virus.
The VLP–nearly identical to the swine flu virus–was developed from a strain of H1N1 isolated from an infected person in California. The particles are not infectious and cannot replicate, but are designed to produce an immune response.


Novavax says it also already manufactured the master seed stock necessary to produce the vaccine in larger quantities. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’s Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases unit has agreed to work with Novavax to evaluate the VLP vaccine.

2009 Vical surges on successful swine flu vaccine tests
Associated Press, 06.30.09, 01:25 PM EDT NEW YORK —

Biopharmaceuticals company Vical Inc. said Tuesday that animal tests of a potential swine flu vaccine were successful.

In the preclinical tests, Vical said all mice and rabbits who were injected with the vaccine were protected from the flu virus. It said 75 percent of the animals reached or surpassed the protection threshold after one dose. Vical said it is ready to move on to large scale manufacturing for testing on humans once it gets the necessary funding.

The San Diego company’s shares climbed on the news, rising 45 cents, or 20 percent, to $2.65 in heavy afternoon trading.

Rodman & Renshaw analyst Reni Benjamin noted the speed of the vaccine’s development, as Vical received a sample of swine flu from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on April 30, shortly after the H1N1 strain emerged.

“These results provide additional validation for Vical’s technology platform, demonstrating not only efficacy and but also speed in generating a vaccine to an influenza strain that emerged in April 2009,” he wrote. Vical is developing its vaccine under an agreement with the U.S. Navy.

Novavax shares skyrocket on new vax pact

By John Carroll
Shares of Rockville, MA-based Novavax shot up more than 30 percent on Tuesday afternoon after the developer announced a licensing deal covering its use of virus-like particles in new vaccines.
Spain’s Rovi Pharmaceuticals Laboratories plans to use Novavax’s technology to develop exclusive new seasonal and pandemic vaccines for Spain and Portugal. Rovi also gets a non-exclusive license for Europe, Latin America and Africa. And Rovi is making a $3 million equity investment in Novavax in the partnership deal.


A non-profit foundation, jointly sponsored by ROVI and the Spanish authorities, will be formed and funded with a 25 million euro credit line from the Spanish government to support Phase III clinical development and other studies necessary to achieve marketing authorization of the VLP influenza vaccines in the European Union in 2012.


The deal represents a coup for Novavax, which has been looking to partner up as a way to gain new capital. “We continue to discuss opportunities with other pharmaceutical companies and governments to implement this compelling influenza vaccine technology around the globe,” CEO Rahul Singhvi says.


2009 Inovio forms collaboration for development of influenza vaccine
Tue. June 30, 2009; Posted: 09:36 AM

Jun 30, 2009 (Datamonitor via COMTEX) Inovio Biomedical, a late stage biomedical company, has established a new collaboration with the National Microbiology Laboratory of the Public Health Agency of Canada and the University of Pennsylvania to further evaluate the company’s DNA vaccine candidates against swine influenza A virus.


As a part of its universal influenza vaccine program, Inovio has designed and manufactured consensus DNA vaccines for H1N1 influenza strains. These consensus vaccines, delivered using Inovio’s proprietary electroporation technology, have the potential to provide protection against a broad scope of existing as well as currently unknown, unmatched influenza strains that could emerge – one of the perpetual challenges in trying to protect against influenza, the company said.


The purpose of this collaboration is to test these vaccine candidates against pandemic and seasonal influenza strains in animal models and will include testing against a recently identified swine H1N1 strain.


Inovio’s influenza vaccine constructs were designed using the company’s novel SynCon technology, which facilitates the design of DNA-based vaccines capable of protecting against unmatched sub-types and strains of pathogens.


Joseph Kim, Inovio’s CEO, said: “The current swine flu outbreak highlights the fact that the world cannot rely solely on the ‘catch-up’ strategy of influenza vaccine design. We need vaccines that provide at least some broad protective capability against evolving seasonal influenza strains and those with pandemic potential.


“We have already achieved significant validating data in large animal models regarding the ability of Inovio’s consensus vaccines to protect against unmatched strains of different influenza sub-types and look forward to the data resulting from this collaboration of vaccine experts.”


July 2009 Scottish government reports that it “is unable to legislate on this issue (of annual vaccination) since legislation on veterinary medicines and veterinary surgeons is a reserved matter.“
2009 (July) WHO – Vaccinate Health Care Workers, Pregnant Women, School Aged
Children First

Filed Under Baxter Worldwide, Big Government, Big Pharma,Pandemic,
Vaccines

Transcript of virtual press conference with Gregory Hartl, WHO Spokesperson for Global Alert and Response and Dr Marie-Paule Kieny, Director of the Initiative for Vaccine Research, World Health Organizationm,14 July 09.

Mr Gregory Hartl: This is WHO Headquarters in Geneva. We welcome you all to this virtual press briefing today. My name is Gregory Hartl and with us today is Dr Marie-Paule Kieny, the Director of the Initiative for Vaccine Research at WHO Headquarters who will make a few opening remarks about the results of the SAGE Committee meeting of last week and their recommendations and then we will open the floor to questions. As always, please, if you have a question to ask please dial 01 to get into the queue to ask the question and state your name and organization. Dr Kieny over to you:

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: Thank you very much Gregory. It is a pleasure to be with you again to give you this update on the recommendation of the SAGE on H1N1 vaccine and vaccination. The SAGE is the Strategy Advisory Group of Experts, that is the highest level of advisory body in WHO on immunization matters and they met last week on 7 July to be updated about the epidemiological status and the clinical status of H1N1 as well as being provided with an update on expected vaccine availability. They also reviewed the status of production of the current seasonal epidemic vaccine.

As you know we are coming to the end of the production campaign for the vaccine which is meant to be used to fight seasonal epidemic of influenza in the northern hemisphere starting this fall and they also met to review various vaccine options that would be available both for seasonal immunization and for H1N1, and to make recommendations to the Director-General. The SAGE, which was helped by a number of experts and also by another committee that we have established in May, which is more specific about the expertise in the area of influenza, so the group together came together with recommendations that were endorsed by the Director-General on Friday. In general these recommendations take into consideration as I said the epidemiology, the severity of the disease, the expected availability of H1N1 vaccine and have come up with a number of recommendations. I will be very happy to detail them following questions but just to give you an idea of how they go.

First, the Committee recognized that the H1N1 pandemic is unstoppable and therefore that all countries will need to have access to vaccines. Second, the Committee also recognized, really acknowledged the fact that different countries have different epidemiological and other situations and therefore that the countries themselves will have to take decisions that are best adapted to their own national situation but in terms of giving indicative consideration and guidance to countries, SAGE recommended first that healthcare workers should be immunized in all countries in order to maintain functional health systems as the pandemic evolves. So there are several reasons to protect health workers when they put themselves at risk, when they care for patients; the other one is because they need to remain in good health condition to care for pandemic influenza sick people and the third is because during the time of a pandemic people will continue to be ill with other diseases and these diseases will also need to be taken care of. Second the SAGE considered the of the disease in various groups and considered that countries gravity may have different strategies when they implement immunization campaigns. So the first one would be to try to stop transmission and if you want to stop transmission as much as you can, and this may still be possible, in certain settings at least to mitigate transmission, you target different population groups, and if you just want to have other objectives: So the first objective is to reduce transmission as much as possible. Another objective might be to reduce morbidity and mortality and the third objective, but there is no priority in order, would be as I said, to protect the health care system.

In view of these three objectives countries might have, and depending on their own decision, they may consider immunization of several different groups – one of them being pregnant women e.g. as I am sure you have followed in the news, pregnant women are at elevated risk of severe diseases and death; other groups would be anybody over 6 months of age with chronic health conditions and these induced variety of conditions which are putting more people more at risk from having severe illness. This could be chronic respiratory disease – it could be obesity which has been now shown as being a risk factor. Another group to be considered would be healthy adults of over 15 years of age and less than 49 which have been shown also to be surprisingly, although were healthy, at risk of death. Yet another group would be healthy children and this is mainly to reduce transmission as we discussed because children are amplifiers of infection because they meet in groups. Yet another group would be healthy elderly adults and all country conditions need to be taken into consideration when countries make decisions.

The SAGE also then, to further go into decision and in going out with recommendation for target groups, considered the safety of adjuvant vaccines and they noted that there was, so far, no concern of the safety of vaccine adjuvanted with the new oil-in-water adjuvants but that it was urgent to collect safety data in groups for which safety data is not available in numbers for the time being. They also noted that because these vaccines are novel, use for some of them, a very good post marketing surveillance and pharmaco- vigilance has to be implemented when the vaccine is deployed and that international cooperation is requested to have results of any signal that some vaccine might not be safe, which we don’t expect but you never know, be shared with the international community as soon as possible.

Finally, they considered recommendations on seasonal influenza vaccination. They were informed that the campaign for preparation of seasonal vaccine for the northern hemisphere were close to completion with more than 90% of production being finalized by end of July and therefore considered that there was no need to recommend a switch from seasonal to H1N1 vaccine. They also considered that at the current time there would be no change in recommendation of WHO for the seasonal vaccine for the next season for the northern hemisphere, that preparations should continue for this immunization as if there would not have been a pandemic. So these are the main messages and I will be most happy to answer your questions.

Mr Gregory Hartl: Dr Kieny, thank you very much. Before we go to questions can I remind journalists that the audio file and transcript will be available shortly afterwards as usual on the WHO website. In addition, a web update outlining in summary, the conclusions of the SAGE meeting will be posted shortly. Once again, journalists who want to ask questions please pr01 on their keypad.

Fergus Walsh, BBC: Regarding the southern hemisphere can you tell me were there any decision made to ask companies like CSL and Sanofi Pasteur who will, in the general run of things, make seasonal flu vaccine for the southern hemisphere, they would normally expect in the autumn, to get the strain from you and do that. Whether or not you are planning to allow next winter’s southern hemisphere seasonal flu vaccine to go ahead or whether you consider the pandemic is serious enough and that they should just concentrate on the pandemic vaccine and secondly, when would you expect the first doses of pandemic vaccine from cell culture to arrive?

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: In terms of southern hemisphere, this was of course discussed and SAGE considered that it was too early to make recommendations on the upcoming production of the southern hemisphere vaccine. Indeed, the southern hemisphere seasonal epidemic has started and now we are in the middle of it. It seems that there is still significant proportion or number of cases which are caused notably by H3N2, one of the seasonal strains. There really needs to be more data accumulated on what is circulating in terms of the new virus or the traditional H1, H3 and B strains. So we expect that all these data, much more data and evidence will be available in September when traditionally WHO will hold its meeting to determine which strain should be put into the seasonal vaccine and by that time we hope that we will be able to be more explicit in giving recommendations in one direction or another. I still need to note that seasonal influenza is a severe disease in certain population groups, like the elderly or the very the young and nobody would want to have an epidemic of severe and preventable seasonal epidemic in nursing homes when winter comes in the southern hemisphere. So this is something which is watched very carefully but it is too early to give any recommendations.

On when the first doses of pandemic vaccine made from cell culture would be available, there are already vaccine doses available. They are produced but they are by no means ready to be licensed yet. So both the doses are available for clinical trials, from both manufacturers who have been making vaccines from cell cultures but also coming very soon or are already there, as you may know, from manufacturers who are making vaccines from egg products.

Notably, CSL in the southern hemisphere has really been rushing to prepare for clinical trials. So when we hear that vaccine is available already, certainly, yes, vaccine has been produced but it is still an experimental vaccine awaiting results of both pharmaceutical characterization to be licensed as well as upon request of regulatory authority clinical trials.

Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: If I could ask 2 questions. The first is a clarification. Dr Kieny you talked about a variety of different groups who might be vaccinated – am I correct in thinking that what you are saying is that the SAGE did not say these people should be first, these people should be second, these people should be third, but that it put a strong priority on health-care workers but after that its somehow left in the hands of individual countries? And I would have a follow-up question.

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: So you are right: the SAGE identified the health- care workers as a main priority group for the three reasons that I already have given. In terms of the other group it really depends on the strategy that each country wants to follow. In certain cases, as I mentioned countries may want to try to mitigate transmission and therefore, children would be an obvious target. In some other cases, they want to rather concentrate on reducing morbidity and mortality and then some other groups may be more the target. But there is identification on various options but no ranking and no priority are given to these options.

Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: The follow-up I wanted to ask in your presentation to that made in last week, you refer to the fact WHO has done a survey of vaccine manufacturers asking them about their plans and if I read the slides correctly, only 12 of the proposed pandemic vaccines are planned to have adjuvants in them. Is WHO getting a sense that a number of manufacturers are not planning of using adjuvants? And do you have a position on whether or not that is appropriate under the circumstances?

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: Indeed it is very difficult in a situation like in a pandemic when you want to have a vaccine which can be distributed safely to the population in the shortest possible time, it is very difficult to say that you take the adjuvant of one company and you mix it with antigens of another company when they have never been tested together. So we know for example that clinical trials financed by the US Government have looked at some of these combinations but these are very specific combinations. So it is very difficult to imagine because as you have seen in the slides, manufacturers are actually, although the vast majority of vaccine doses is coming from companies in certain areas of the world, there are actually vaccines manufacturers in other parts of the world, and these are producing less vaccines in terms of output in number of doses, but it would be very difficult to say let us just for the sake of taking an example that you take vaccines from country X in Asia which has never been a mix of any of this new adjuvant and then you just make the mix and you say that this is my vaccine and it will be safe because the safety of adjuvant is not only depending on the adjuvant itself, it is quite often combined fact between the purity of the antigen of a certain characteristics of the antigen and the adjuvant. So this is why a number of manufacturers who currently have never made any other vaccines than non adjuvanted vaccines are still planning to go with non-adjuvanted vaccines. I may also add a comment on that for the time being there is still the question to know whether the immunogenicity of the A(H1N1) vaccine will be more like that we are used to for seasonal vaccine where no problem with 15 micrograms not adjuvanted, just one dose is fine or will it be more like H5N1 where all the trials have shown that you either need to have a very potent adjuvant or you need to increase the dose quite significantly, so in the absence of theses responses, yes a number of manufacturers are planning to go ahead with 50 microgram without adjuvant.

Martin Enserink, Science Magazine: Helen Branswell reported this morning or late last night from those presentations that the virus is not growing very well. I wonder if you can comment on that, and whether that will cause any delay? Secondly, has SAGE made any recommendations with regard to international solidarity? Is there any talk of any recommendations to create equity between countries, for instance you mentioned that countries can have different strategies but would it not be recommendable that they use only the vaccine for those high-risk groups and save vaccines for other countries?

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: First, in terms of yields, maybe there is some confusion between the reality that is in the slides, that is now recognized by the manufacturers and the regulatory authorities and the WHO Network that we have a strain which are currently available to make inactivated vaccine, the manufacturers only get moderately affected yields. This is not to say that the viruses grow poorly, it is that for a reason or another the hemagglutinin they can produce is either not stable or very low. It is not known what is exactly happening but in terms of output that they have of hemagglutinin at the end when they grow a virus, they have poor yields, poor as between 25 and 50 percent of the normal yields that they have with good yielders. What is the reason for this is difficult to know, that it is well known that some strains are good yielders and some are bad yielders, it happens that for the first series of strains which were generated and unfortunately, we did not come up with a good yielder.

So that in order to remedy to that the WHO laboratory network is again trying to generate new vaccines viruses from wild type virus isolated from patients, and these will be tested again by the manufacturers and we hope that at least one of them or more than that we hope will be giving higher yields that would be comparable to the ones obtained with seasonal vaccines. So for the time being, these are strains which are available and are still giving of course enough production yields in order to make clinical batches into test immunogenicity of new vaccines. We understand that the regulatory authorities have said that when better yielders are available there will not be a need to have bridging studies between the results obtained with the strains available now and the new strains because actually there will be difference in yields and not in antigenicity or immunogenicity. So we hope that as soon as possible the situation can be improved upon but for the time being there is no reason to be really anxious about that.

In terms of equity, yes of course, SAGE has also made a note that WHO should try to help with as much equity as is there in the distribution of vaccines. We are all committed to that, we have several strategies, we are discussing with the industry and we have already, this was announced in the press, we have already secured a number of donations from industry, we have also secured access to real time production during the pandemic. WHO at the highest level is discussing with Governments to see how much they can help to either help negotiate some doses with industry but also help finance these vaccines and finally, but very importantly, we are also discussing with new manufacturers who have started to acquire the technology to make influenza vaccines in the past three years with technical and financial support from us, to help them accelerate their preparation and be able to produce some vaccines for their own country. So this is the situation in terms of trying to ensure equity for vaccines.

Richard Knox, National Public Radio: Dr Kieny, you said earlier that you do not expect safety issues to arise with the pandemic vaccine and tests but do you think that there is less risk of Guillain-Barre syndrome with this new swine flu vaccine than there was in 1976 and why? And secondly, I wonder with the accelerated safety tests that will be necessary, how many subjects will you expect to have tested and how can experts draw conclusions about safety from these tests when the vaccine has put into a hundreds of millions of people.

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: It is not completely known why the vaccine which was distributed against the swine flu in 1976 induced higher risk of Guillain-Barre syndrome. There are a number of hypotheses and one of the hypotheses is that the vaccine was contaminated by a component coming from a bacterial infection that was inducing antibodies that cross reacted with self protein and therefore, caused Guillain-Barre syndrome. The vaccines which are produced now are much better purified than the way they were in 1976, so we really do not think that it is likely that we will have these side effects again, but to be absolutely honest, of course it is only when you have a large scale distribution of vaccines that you know with certainty the safety profile of the vaccine. Modern vaccines such as those which are used to immunize children and adults currently in all countries of the world are very safe products. Nevertheless, in a very small numbers of people they do induce adverse reactions and this can be the case as well for adjuvanted vaccines and non adjuvanted vaccines. So what needs to be put in place and everyone is working towards this direction is a very good surveillance system and monitoring adverse effects so that as soon as a signal pops up it can immediately be followed-up, investigated and adequate public health measures be taken to respond to that.

Now, in terms of these new vaccines, new adjuvants there is one manufacturer who has had an oil-in-water adjuvanted influenza vaccine in use for many years for seasonal vaccination and the safety database for this particular antigen is very large although mainly in elderly people and there does not seem to be any signal for any unexpected severe event like Guillain-Barre. But as I said, all must be put in place to detect any signal as early as possible.

Journalist, Sky Television: Your referred previously that the obese people should probably be among those that the national government should consider to vaccinate. On what scientific basis are made these recommendations and if you could elaborate more on the body mass index? And the second question is, if we have the vaccine later than October in the Northern Hemisphere, don’t you think it would be too late to protect the people from the second pandemic wave?

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: In terms of obesity, obesity has been observed as being one of the risk factors for more severe diseases other than H1N1 influenza. This is an observation. We still don’t know exactly if it is obesity itself which is a risk factor, or if it is other health conditions which arise because of obesity. For the time being it is an observation and a lot of investigations are conducted to try and understand this better.

It has been observed in several countries that people with a body mass index over 30, and even more, over 40, have a higher chance of having a severe disease than noon obese people. This is why one of the groups that was mentioned, that was listed by SAGE, and that was worth considering for pandemic influenza vaccination contains all populations over 6 months of age with risk factors, and one of the risk factor listed is obesity. Its not the only one of course, you have asthma, chronic lung disease. All these are considered as being risk factors based on observation so far. About availability of vaccines, all the manufacturers and the regulatory authorities are working to have vaccine available as soon as possible. Vaccines will be available starting from September or October. If the situation remains as it is, of course the regulatory authorities will certainly want to have a better handle at the safety in clinical trials and dosing in clinical trials and these clinical trials will take some time, and therefore, to have a full license of this new vaccine may take until the end of the year. This being said, many countries have provision in their law, so if there is an emergency they can invoke an emergency situation to use vaccine for which you would have already good characterization in terms of pharmaceutical data but not yet, all the data on clinical trials. We certainly look towards seeing how the epidemic evolves and when it unfolds, to see what is the situation in countries and we will take our own decisions on whether or not to use vaccine under an emergency provision as compared to waiting for full registration of these vaccines.

Maggie Fox, Reuters: If WHO wants to reassess its best case scenario for how many vaccine doses might be available – I think the last number for the best case scenario was 4.9 billion. And I am also wondering about this issue with the virus strain not producing good results. Was this also the same for the live vaccine or only for the killed vaccine?

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: In terms of updating the figures that we have published for likely vaccine supply over the next 12 months, we will update these figures but we want to wait to have some further information to update these with some meaningful changes. First as we have to have a definite idea of what yield manufacturers are getting with inactivated vaccines: is it the same as seasonal, which was the assumption that we took when we made the first calculation, or is it 50%, and these of course as you may imagine will change the total output. The other information which is still lacking as what is a dose of inactivated H1N1 vaccine. Is it, without adjuvant, is it 50 micrograms, is it 30 micrograms, we don’t know. And we will know as soon as the result of the first clinical trial will come out, although the result will certainly be very adapted or relevant only to the vaccine which will be tested, it will still give a flavour of what kind of results we will have with the other inactivated vaccines. You asked a question about the live-attenuated vaccine, the response and the way this vaccine induces an immune response is very different because these are replicative organisms, so they induce antibodies and also anti-cell response.

So for the time being, the results that we have from the manufacturers who make live-attenuated vaccines, is that in terms of yields, and this is yields in terms of growth this time – how these vaccine strains grow – there does not seem to be any surprise and they grow with the same titres as the seasonal vaccine that they have obtained in normal production for a seasonal vaccine. Still there need to be clinical trials to know what titres of these live-attenuated vaccines will have to be used in a dose to make an effective dose. So the quick response is that we don’t know, but in terms of growth they seem to be behaving normally.

Journalist, Scrip Pharmaceutical News: When the new pandemic vaccine becomes available later this year, will WHO or Member States have any new pharmaco-vigilance initiative to pick up ADRs (ADVERSE REACTIONS) to this new vaccine. For example, in some countries, they allow patients to report ADRs as other do not. Is WHO thinking about this or are you quite happy with existing pharmaco-vigilance systems?

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: Although in some countries the pharmaco-vigilance system is working very well and we will pick up signals (ADVERSE REACTIONS) very easily, in other countries there need to be an increased attention to the pharmaco-vigilance system, notably in the developing countries and WHO is already working with countries to try and use systems in place, like the system that the Polio Initiative uses to detect cases of acute flaccid paralysis to try and help detect any signs of Guillain- Barre for example. We are both strengthening the network as well as working on new guidelines that will be more adapted to the detection of adverse events following vaccination with pandemic influenza vaccine.

Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: I would like to get some information about adjuvants and children. Obviously young people are among the people hardest hit by this strain so far but I don’t think that there is much evidence at all about safety of adjuvants in that group. I was looking at a document yesterday that shows that with MS59 for instance, it has been given to 6 or 700 children which is not a long safety record. Are there any other vaccines – not influenza vaccines –but marketed vaccines with these kind of adjuvants that children receive now and that might give us a sense of whether or not they are safe to use in children?

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: You are absolutely right that safety data, at least in terms of numbers are lacking in certain population groups. You mentioned the children, certainly there are no data in children more than 6 months old and less than 3 years, there are no data in pregnant women, there are no data in asthmatics, so there are quite a number of populations for which there are no data. SAGE has also made the point that as quickly as possible data should be obtained on these populations groups if they are to be vaccinated with these new vaccines. In terms of use of this new novel adjuvant in children, there is no vaccine for very young children that is using the formulation. The closest being the vaccine which is currently developed as the malaria vaccine, which has been tested in a few thousand children and is being tested now in Africa with this indication for malaria in a few thousand children, but apart from that, these data are still lacking.

Journalist, German Television: If I understand correctly, talking about the doses for the next winter, do we have to go for a mid- seasonal vaccine and then also to go for two other doses for the new pandemic vaccination, will there be enough vaccine for all the countries then?

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: The vaccine against seasonal influenza for the Northern Hemisphere is finishing production. We expect to have more than 90% of doses which were planned to be produced, so this is very close to the number of doses that were produced in 2008. We don’t envisage changes in the recommendation for seasonal vaccination, so vaccination will still target the same persons and as in the previous national recommendations mainly in most countries these people will be the elderly, over 60 or 65 years of age, also in some countries children as well, so yes, certain of these groups may receive during the upcoming fall three shots which could be one of seasonal vaccine and two for the pandemic vaccine.

Mr Gregory Hartl: Dr Kieny, thank you very much. That closes our virtual press conference for today, 13 July, from WHO headquarters in Geneva. And just before we say goodbye, one last reminder that there will be 3 things posted on the WHO website shortly: the normal audio file and transcript and in addition, a web update which outlines recommendations from the SAGE meeting will also be shortly available.

Goodbye.

2009 July. Swiss army stockpiles “swine flu” vaccines in preparation for mass forced vaccination. By birdflu666 30 July 09

The army in Switzerland is starting to stockpile “swine flu” vaccines as it gears up for a mass forced vaccination of the Swiss population in autumn, according to a report in the Basler Zeitung.

http://bazonline.ch/schweiz/standard/Erste-Impfspritzen-in-der-Schweiz-eingetroffen/story/22051646

The Swiss army today received the first shipment of a total of 16 million doses of vaccines as well as needles in readiness for mass forced vaccination of the entire population using two doses.

Thomas Meister, the head of pharmacy products and technology of the army pharmacy department, told Swiss TV that the vaccines came from USA, Germany and Spain, but it is not clear which pharmaceutical companies delivered them and whether Baxter was one of them.

It is not clear either whether the vaccines have passed clinical trials or whether they have been subjected to any safety tests.

The Swiss Ministry of Health ordered the army to buy the vaccines on the basis of the country’s pandemic plan – and WHO’s instructions to all 194 member states to mass vaccinate their populations by use of force.

The Cantons of Switzerland are reported to have plans already in place to force every single person living in each Canton to appear at a “vaccine center” at a specified time to take the vaccine or face prison.*

The local police have been instructed to go through the register and ring every single person to get them to go to their vaccine center during the pandemic “emergency” predicted by “WHO” to occur from September onwards*. No exceptions to the vaccine will be allowed.

2009 July

http://birdflu666.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/swiss-army-stockpiles-swine-flu-vaccines-in-preparation-for-mass-forced-vaccination-in-autumn/
*
Mass vaccination against flu

Thu, 02-Jul-2009
http://www.norwaypost.no/content/view/22196/26/

The Norwegian health authorities will this fall begin a program of mass vaccination against the A H1N1 flu, also called the swine flu. A total of 9.4 million doses have been ordered from the suppliers.

All will be given two innoculations, two weeks apart, Bergens Tidende reports. The total cost will be NOK 650 million.

So far, only 23 cases of the flu has been diagnosed in Norway, but the authorities expect that the number will increase.

(NRK)

Rolleiv Solholm
2009 August Greece to Vaccinate Population for Swine Flu

Filed Under Pandemic, Vaccines
Greece will vaccinate its entire population of 12 million against the H1N1 swine flu pandemic which has swept around the world in weeks, killing hundreds of people, the country’s health minister said on Friday.

The Mediterranean country, which receives about 15 million tourists every year, has confirmed more than 700 swine flu cases and no deaths, but world health experts say the true number of cases globally is far higher as only a few patients get tested.

We decided that the entire population, all citizens and residents, without any exception, will be vaccinated against the flu,” Health Minister Dimitris Avramopoulos said after a ministerial meeting.

Greece has already earmarked 40 million euros for vaccines and has placed orders with Novartis, Glaxo and Sanofi for 8 million vaccine doses, to be received gradually by January.

Vaccine experts say people will likely need two doses of vaccine to be protected from H1N1 swine flu, so Greece would need a total of 24 million doses to vaccinate its entire population. Other countries are taking similar steps.

Greece will order 16 million more doses from the same companies in the future,” a health ministry official who declined to be named told Reuters.

We are only waiting for the European Union’s approval to start vaccinating everyone.”

The European Medicines Agency has begun reviewing pandemic flu vaccines under development, aiming to get them approved before the flu season starts, sometime in September.

The health ministry official said children, the elderly and ailing would be the first to be vaccinated.

About 800 people have died worldwide since the outbreak of the flu in April.

http://tvnz.co.nz/health-news/greece-vaccinate-population-swine-flu-2881876

ONE WOMAN IN CAMAROON CATCHES “HIV” FROM A GORILLA AND LIKE
THE ANDROMEDA STRAIN, IT MUTATES IMMEDIATELY TO FORM A NEW,
RAPIDLY GROWING, PROBABLY WIDESPRED, DEADLY PANDEMIC AIDS VIRUS.
2009-10.

New HIV strain discovered in woman from Cameroon, Randolph Schmidt Ap Science Writer

A new strain of the virus that causes AIDS has been discovered in a [black] woman from the African nation of Cameroon.

It differs from the three known strains of human immunodeficiency virus and appears to be closely related to a form of simian virus recently discovered in wild gorillas, researchers report in Monday’s edition of the journal Nature Medicine.

The finding “highlights the continuing need to watch closely for the emergence for new HIV variants, said the researchers, led by Jean-Christophe Plantier of the University of Rouen, France.

The three previously known HIV strains are related to the simian virus that occurs in chimpanzees.
The most likely explanation for the new find is gorilla-to-human transmission, Plantier’s team said. But they added they cannot rule out the possibility that the new strain started in chimpanzees and moved into gorillas and then humans, or moved directly from chimpanzees to both gorillas and humans.

The 62-year-old patient tested positive for HIV in 2004, shortly after moving to Paris from Cameroon, according to the researchers. She had lived near Yaounde, the capital of Cameroon, but said she had no contact with apes or bush meat, a name often given to meat from wild animals in tropical countries. The woman currently shows no signs of AIDS and remains untreated, though she still carries the virus, the researchers said.

How widespread this strain is remains to be determined. Researchers said it could be circulating unnoticed in Cameroon or elsewhere. The virus’ rapid replication indicates that it is adapted to human cells, the researchers reported. Their research was supported by the French Health Watch Institute, the French National Agency for Research on AIDS and Viral Hepatitis and Rouen University Hospital.

October 01, 2009
Fourteen year old Natalie Morton, walked into school yesterday a happy, healthy little girl. Sadly, today she did not and tragically she will never walk through her school gates again. Yesterday Natalie was given one dose of the Cervarix HPV vaccine, the vaccine that the UK Government has portrayed as safe, a vaccine that Glaxo Smith Kline has said over and over is safe. For this little girl Cervarix was not because she died just a few hours later.

If Natalie was an isolated incident it could be seen to be a tragic but extremely rare allergic reaction. It is a recognised fact that all vaccines and medications carry risks but Cervarix has been in use for just under a year and although this is the first death associated with the vaccine, it is far from being the first adverse event. The adverse events are mounting up at an alarming rate.

These are recent figure taken from the MHRA or the Yellow Card reporting system

“This report summarises the adverse reactions suspected to have been caused by Cervarix human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in the UK. This includes reports received between 14 April 2008 and 23 September 2009. These reports have been voluntarily submitted to the MHRA by healthcare professionals and members of the public via the Yellow Card Scheme .

SUMMARY OF UK SAFETY EXPERIENCE

Total number of reports received: 2,137

Total number of suspected reactions: 4,657

Estimated number of doses administered across the UK: at least 1.4 million doses”

These are the number reported so far as at 24th September 2009.

409 0f these reports are of anaphylaxic shock which can if left untreated lead to death, so is a severe reaction more common than we are led to believe?

As yet it is not known conclusively that Natalie died from the Cervarix vaccine but given that classmates also suffered reactions albeit mild in comparison, it is definitely time to get worried.

A full investigation is under way and the batch of vaccines that all the girls were vaccinated with has been quarantined as a precaution. A possible faulty batch is being blamed.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/115767
Gardasil is proven dangerous, yet it is still mandatory for immigrants
Christina England

August 24, 2009
This week has shown that a large number of reports stating that Gardasil is proving unsafe. News stations around the world have reported that Gardasil the HPV vaccine has been found to cause adverse reactions. The adverse reactions range from mild, such as headaches, nausea and fainting, to the more severe such as seizures, blood clots, Guillian Barre Syndrome and even death. This information has come to light since the publication of the JAMA papers on the 19th August 2009, showing the results of the VAERS Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. The Gardasil data published was collected from June 1, 2006 through December 31, 2008.

Merck has only recently changed packaging showing acknowledgement that this vaccine causes fainting and seizures in some children.

Information Pertaining to Labeling Revision for Gardasil

“On June 9, 2009, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a revised label for Gardasil, a vaccine to protect against cervical, vulvar and vaginal cancers caused by Human Papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 and genital warts caused by HPV types 6 and 11. In the new label, information pertaining to syncope (fainting) is now also included in the Warnings and Precautions section, and this section has new information noting that individuals who faint sometimes have tonic-clonic (jerking) movements and seizure-like activity. The addition of syncope to the Warnings and Precautions section emphasizes that healthcare providers and consumers should be alert that fainting may occur following vaccination with Gardasil, sometimes resulting in falling and injuries. To prevent falls and injuries all vaccine recipients should remain seated or lying down and be closely observed for 15 minutes following vaccination.”

Cynthia Janak a USA journalist has been writing and proving this vaccine is unsafe for the last few years. Her website Only the Truth gives tribute to the many girls who have lost their life after taking Gardasil shots. This site points out and lists the adverse reactions, showing pictures of beautiful young woman now no longer with us, other pages have stories of girls suffering every day from the adverse reactions to this vaccine. There is up to date news and views on Gardasil.

News stories have been hitting America for three years about the dangers of this vaccine. Stories like this one 2007 Did Gardasil Vaccine Cause a 12-yr-old Girl’s Paralysis and Girl Dies after HPV Jab – CDC Blame Birth Control Pill

Merck says however, Merck Says FDA And CDC Reaffirm Safety Profile Of Gardasil – Update

“Based on the review of available information by FDA and CDC, Gardasil continues to be safe and effective, and its benefits continue to outweigh its risks.”

Confusing that because if Merck were so convinced that their vaccine was safe why have they recently changed the labelling?

Diane Harper who worked on the Gardasil trials has reservations. Harper told CNN she has concerns about the safety of the HPV vaccine for pre-adolescents, noting that a small number of girls have died or suffered neurological damage after receiving the shot.

However, despite the controversy surrounding this vaccine, with much information proving it to be unsafe, it appears not only is still being offered to teenage girls across the USA and the world today but is a mandatory vaccine for immigrants wanting to come into the USA. In a sickening story in a letter passed to me a grandmother who has been raising her grandchild and was trying to escape to the USA from domestic violence was refused entry because she refused after researching Gardasil. to let her grandchild have it. The letter also shows 140 immigration rights, women´s rights, public health, medical, and reproductive justice organizations including an attorney have joined a coalition in NYS.The letter to the CDC was written as the author felt the vaccine activists might want to know the names of political organizations opposing the US immigration regulation that requires immigrants receive the Gardasil shot.

So why is it that USA citizens in many states have the option to choose whether they or their children have the HPV vaccine but immigrants can not? In order to become a permanent, legal resident of the U.S, immigrants now must receive a vaccine that is not required of U.S. citizens. This is like saying these people are less important or more likely to be infected. This surely is wrong.

One comment on the subject on the Age of Autism in 2008 from a concerned professional said:-

“36 death report with Gardasil, VAERS database now has 13,667 adverse events reports. Merck Kgaa knew that boric acid causes convulsions in 1945. Your FDA and CDC and Merck still denies the problems with this aluminum vaccine. DO NOT TREAT TREAT THESE IMMIGRANTS LIKE LAB RATS. THEY HAVE SUFFERED ENOUGH,DO NOT DESTROY THEIR HEALTH AND THEIR FUTURE OFFSPRING HEALTH WITH THIS TOXIC VACCINE.IT IS THE POLYSORBATE 80 AND THE BORIC ACID THAT IS IN THE VACCINE THAT WILL CAUSE CANCER. PLEASE DO NOT USE THE IMMIGRANTS AS GUINEA PIGS. THIS IS AN EXPERIMENTAL VACCINE, PLEASE, DO NOT EXPERIMENT ON THE IMMIGRANTS.”

The letter outlines that 140 organisations oppose the Gardasil Mandate

Clearly this shows massive opposition and anger that this vaccine is being forced on all 11 – 26 female immigrants wishing to enter the USA. This shows a degree of possible discrimination against immigrants, not only by the CDC but by the American Government. To force a vaccine that is essentially against the HPV virus which is being advertised as being a STD on any children is wrong. All parents should have the rights to refuse a vaccine, especially in the light of what is in the JAMA papers, Is this the first step to vaccines becoming mandatory throughout the whole of the USA? Maybe the CDC needs to rethink this decision, especially in the light of the recent evidence showing that this vaccine is proving to be unsafe. Immigrants should have the same rights as anyone else to the freedom of choice, as the concerned professional said many have suffered enough.

2009 The lastest and largest was just published in the NEJM, with Anthony Fauci and others claiming for the first time, a 3% rate of protection (over background levels) without the vaccine. However, if you look at the numbers published regarding the trial involving 16,000 recipients, 8,000 controls injected with aluminum, and 8,000 injected with aluminum and gp120, and a difference a in “true seroconversion” between the two groups was 0.6% (of 8,000) aluminum “HIV”: versus 0.8% with aluminum only.

However, the CIA website (of all places-you will see later how Bill Clinton and these agencies deemed “HIV” a National Security Issue in the information presented about A History of AIDS on this website), and find that the rate of seroconversion in Thailand at background levels is 1.3 percent without any vaccination, one only can conclude that the cheapest way to “immunize” those promiscuous barbarians is to inject them with aluminum (its cheap)!

Here are the numbers more visibly:

Aluminum boosted Aluminum without Background “HIV” detection:

gp120 “background” gp120 Military-Thailand trial aluminum

1.3% 0.6% 0.8%

The numbers would make it appear that it is a good idea to inject everybody with aluminum only because it is cheap-and will reduce the levels of “HIV” detection by 0.5% in the absence of co-injected and expensive to acquire and manufacture gp120 (1.3 is the background levels) -0.8=0.5%). This trial cost 101 + million? But that is not all we got for that expenditure combined with the 500 million a year spent for the 172 vaccines currently in “the pipeline.”

Look at the numbers for the largest trial ever conducted, which Fauci says had a 31% success rate and had no statistical significance that involved no more than 50 people in the experimental versus 7 1 in the control-who went on to acquire “REAL” HIV.” If background level of detection of “REAL” “HIV” is 1.3%, then you go like Fauci did and eliminate two types of statistical analyses (the “intent to treat group and per protocol group), and only count the “modified intent to treat analysis” as statistically significant when 30% of the folks not analyzed in the “modified intent to treat group” are dropped from that analysis, and yes, you achieve statistical significance) !!!. Such creative figure juggling provides Fauci with his 31%, and,  according to my reading of this interesting paper, we have both an end to the fraudulance of the AIDS era, or vaccination: take your pick. And somehow, according to Fauci, the efficacy shoots up to a staggering 50% success rate, by dropping only 1/3 of the recipients by counting only those in the first of 3 years following the first vaccination of the series, and eliminating the rest.

But this is cheating using numbers and fancy words. It isn’t science. It is highly premeditated lying.

This is not to mention the 7 patients that “seroconverted” during “the window period” to a “true” “HIV-positive result” that were dropped from the modified intent to treat analysis, changing the numbers to 57 versus 71, or conversely, 79 versus 51, depending on which of the two groups these excluded groups belonged to in the initial recruitment, which would completely change the 0.6% vesus 0.8% groups, with only these few individuals dropped from that analysis. Then you add the deaths due to the experimental or control vaccines laced with the toxic metal aluminum that number somewhere between 5-10 (it isn’t clear), and the statistics change again. Or try counting in the NEMJ analysis the poor Thailand folks that developed potentially life long health issue(s) (defined as unable to work on the NEMJ supplement document) due to the either the experimental or placebo vaccine. These damaged individuals due to both the experimental (and placebo) aluminum-laced vaccines also were not counted, or they were excluded from the analysis published in the “supplement” in The New England Journal of Medicine but not in the main article. The numbers according to my estimation amount to about 340 “HIV/Aluminum” vaccinated, versus about 71 controls (aluminum only) that would have had adverse reactions and missed work because of disability due to the control or experimental vaccines.

The Military-Thailand Trial that didn’t achieve statistical significance with more than 16 thousand participants unless you fudge the data and cheat and exclude 1/3 of the folks:

Supachai Rerks-Ngarm, M.D., Punnee Pitisuttithum, M.D., D.T.M.H., Sorachai Nitayaphan, M.D., Ph.D., Jaranit Kaewkungwal, Ph.D., Joseph Chiu, M.D., Robert Paris, M.D., Nakorn Premsri, M.D., Chawetsan Namwat, M.D., Mark de Souza, Ph.D., Elizabeth Adams, M.D., Michael Benenson, M.D., Sanjay Gurunathan, M.D., Jim Tartaglia, Ph.D., John G. McNeil, M.D., Donald P. Francis, M.D., D.Sc.,

The Military-Thailand Trial that didn’t achieve statistical significance with more than 16 thousand participants unless you fudge the data and cheat and exclude 1/3 of the folks:

Donald Stablein, Ph.D., Deborah L. Birx, M.D., Supamit Chunsuttiwat, M.D., Chirasak Khamboonruang, M.D., Prasert Thongcharoen, M.D., Ph.D., Merlin L. Robb, M.D., Nelson L. Michael, M.D., Ph.D., Prayura Kunasol, M.D., and Jerome H. Kim, M.D. for the MOPH–TAVEG InvestigatorsDonald Stablein, Ph.D., Deborah L. Birx, M.D., Supamit Chunsuttiwat, M.D., Chirasak Khamboonruang, M.D., Prasert Thongcharoen, M.D., Ph.D., Merlin L. Robb, M.D., Nelson L. Michael, M.D., Ph.D., Prayura Kunasol, M.D., and Jerome H. Kim, M.D. for the MOPH–TAVEG Investigators N Engl J Med 2009; 361:2209-2220l, December 3, 2009 (December 3, 2009).

A total of 26,676 volunteers were screened and 16,402 were enrolled (intention-to-treat group). The 12,542 subjects who completed all (6) vaccination visits on schedule and were not found to have HIV-1 infection after receiving the full vaccination regimen were included in the per-protocol analysis. Seven volunteers who were found to be seropositive for HIV-1 on the first test after vaccination were determined by RNA testing to have been infected at enrollment and were not included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, leaving 16,395 volunteers: 8197 in the vaccine group and 8198 in the placebo group. This group consisted of 10,064 men (61.4% of the subjects) and 6331 women (38.6%). Baseline characteristics were similar for selected variables, and there was no imbalance between the two groups in self-described risk behavior. Baseline Characteristics of the Subjects (Modified Intention-to-Treat Population).”

There were no substantive changes in serial self-reports of risk behavior during the trial. No data were collected on the status of male circumcision or on serologic analyses for adenovirus type 5 or herpes simplex virus type 2.”

There were 52,985 person-years of follow-up (15% more than planned). At 42 months, 14,672 of the volunteers (89.5%) had completed the trial and were HIV-seronegative..

Adverse Events

“Most local and systemic reactions to the vaccine were mild to moderate and reflected the findings of studies on the safety of these products that have been reported previously12,17,27-29 (Fig. 1 in the Supplementary Appendix). Most reactions were mild to moderate and resolved within 3 days after vaccination (but some killed recipients and prevented them from returning to work for an undisclosed period of time). At least one adverse event was reported in 69.4% of subjects in the two study groups. The number of deaths and the frequency and severity of adverse events and serious adverse events were similar in the two groups (Table 1 in the Supplementary Appendix).”

Primary End Points: “HIV-1 Infection”

HIV-1 infection was diagnosed in 132 subjects (56 in the vaccine group and 76 in the placebo group) during 52,985 person-years of follow-up in the intention-to-treat analysis, in 86 subjects (36 in the vaccine group and 50 in the placebo group) during 36,720 person-years of follow-up in the per-protocol analysis, and in 125 subjects (51 in the vaccine group and 74 in the placebo group) during 52,985 person-years of follow-up in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. One subject in the placebo group who was identified by hospital record as being seropositive for HIV after dying from Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia was included in the analysis before the unblinding of the study. This diagnosis of HIV-1 infection was the only one that occurred outside planned procedures.

—INTENTION-TO-TREAT ANALYSIS: 132 SUBJECTS INFECTED (56/8197 VACCINATED AND 76/8198 PLACEBO

—PER PROTOCOL ANALYSIS: 86 SUBJECTS INFECTED (36 VACCINATED, 50 PLACEBO)

—MODIFIED INTENTION-T0-TREAT ANALYSIS (the one Fauci is claiming a 31%$ success rate regarding) : ONLY ONE WITH STAT SIGNIFICANCE…was recorded when 1/3 of the patients were dropped from the analysis-which is cheating…..and the one reported in the NEMJ as being the first “HIV” vaccine trial to show promise since 1983).

Out of 16, 395 125 out of (8197) SUBJECTS “INFECTED” (51) THAT WERE FULLY VACCINATED; Out of 8198, 70 PLACEBO WERE “INFECTED” THAT WERE FULLY VACCINATED.

There were 86 HIV-1 infections in the per-protocol population and 125 infections in the modified intention-to-treat population. There were three categories into which the 39 subjects with HIV-1 infection who were excluded from the per-protocol population could be organized: 10 subjects (3 in the vaccine group and 7 in the placebo group) were infected during the vaccination phase and received all vaccinations on schedule; 10 subjects (3 in the vaccine group and 7 in the placebo group) were “infected” after the vaccination phase and received all vaccinations, but one or more vaccinations were not administered during the pre-s-pecified window; and 19 subjects (9 in the vaccine group and 10 in the placebo group) were infected after the vaccination phase but did not receive all vaccinations.

In this clinical trial, we evaluated the efficacy of ALVAC-HIV priming and AIDSVAX B/E boosting for the prevention of HIV-1 infection in more than 16,000 young Thai adults at community risk for such infection. In the intention-to-treat group (which included seven subjects who were found to have had HIV-1 infection at baseline), there was a trend toward prevention of infection with the vaccine regimen. In the per-protocol analysis, which excluded 30% of the end points and person-years of follow-up, the results were not significant. However, after the exclusion of the subjects who were infected with HIV-1 before vaccination, the modified intention-to-treat analysis showed a significant, though modest, reduction in the rate of HIV-1 infection, as compared with placebo. “Although there were increased env responses in the vaccinated, and increased gag responses in placebo, neither is statistically significant. (Env 165 and LAI gag (120?) peptides were used)?The trial demonstrated that the vaccine regimen was safe and modestly effective in preventing HIV infection. The results show that the prime-boost combination lowered the rate of HIV infection by 31.2 percent compared to placebo based on the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population (n=51 vs. n=74, respectively; p=0.04). NO infections (“VIRAL LOAD MEASUREMENTS).”

Vaccination with ALVAC and AIDSVAX to Prevent HIV-1 Infection in Thailand

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0908492#t=article

For the number of deaths due to vaccine which outnumber the quantity excluded from the analysis (10 deaths here and there due to vaccine), see:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa0908492/suppl_file/nejm_rerks-ngarm_2209sa1.pdf

To determine the viral load in samples tested in Thailand, the scientists used AMPLICOR’S 1.5 TEST. But 1996 and in 2004, Roche warned on its package insert that “The amplicor HIV-1 monitor test is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV, nor as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection” (Roche’s amplicor HIV-1 monitor test package insert, 1996).

To determine viral load in samples sent to the states, a recalled test was used called Procelix: In January of 2005, the FDA recalled Procleix HIV-1 – HCV Assay.

Conclusion of the largest “HIV” vaccine trial in history:

Conclusions about gp120:

We do not understand the immune mechanisms mediating the results that we observed. The ALVAC-HIV and AIDSVAX B/E prime–boost regimen induces a broad constellation of immune responses against HIV-1, including T-cell–line adapted neutralizing antibody (71% with response), antibody-directed, cell-mediated cytotoxicity, CD4+ lymphoproliferation (61% with response to gp20 MN, 63% with response to gp120 CM244), and CD8+ T cells (24% with response to 51Cr-release cytotoxic T-cell assay; 17% with positive response on ELISPOT),17,33,43

but these may not be the relevant responses.”

SCIENTISTS DISCOVER A NEW VIRUS CAUSING AIDS.

2010 News: World by Nikolai Terziev January 17,

Chinese scientists have discovered a previously unknown virus that can cause a syndrome of acquired immune deficiency (AIDS).Until now it was believed that a person may develop AIDS only after infected with HIV.

But Chinese scholars argue that there is another virus that has yet to be studied and led to the development of the disease.”Thousands of patients who have AIDS have tested negative for HIV test,” said one of the doctors. Experts explain that this hypothetical mutation of HIV is more aggressive and dangerous when transmitted through sex [as opposed to sharing a hamburger with someone—my observation].

Studies of the new virus began on Monday and still no clear date when results will be announced.

2010 (March) Danish Scientist who “proved” vax don’t cause autism disappears with $2 million: Key character who “proved” vaccines don’t cause autism.

A Danish scientist who was a key researcher in two studies thatpurport to show that mercury used in vaccines and themeasles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine do not cause autism is believed to have used forged documents to steal $2 million from Aarhus Universityin Denmark according to reports in the Copenenhagen Post Online and astatement from Aarhus University.

Poul Thorsen, MD PhD, headed up a research unit at Aarhus Universitythat was hired by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention toprepare a series of studies that would exonerate thimerosal, amercury-based preservative and adjuvant used in vaccines, and the MMRvaccine from any role in causing autism. The veracity of the threestudies he co-authored is now in doubt.
These studies formed the foundation for the conclusions of severalInstitute of Medicine reports that claimed that it was highly unlikelythat thimerosal or MMR were implicated in autism.

In a statement Aarhus University officials said that believe Poulsenforged documents supposedly from the CDC to obtain the release of $2 million from the University. Poulsen resigned abruptly in March 2009and left Denmark. Since then Thorsen has held several jobs in the US,first at Emory University in Atlanta and then at Drexel University inPhiladelphia. Documents show that as late as January 22, 2009. Thorsenwas employed at Drexel. Any reference to Poulsen has now been deletedfrom the Drexel website.

Investigations also revealed that while employed full-time for theUniversity of Aarhus in Denmark, Poulsen simultaneously held afulltime position at Emory University in Atlanta, and drew salaries
from both Universities despite a contract with Aarhus forbiddingoutside employment. According to the statement from Aarhus University.

Autism advocacy groups have published extensive analyses on Thorsen’sstudies and found many problems in methods, assumptions andconclusions that are supported by the data. And Thorsen is the
lynchpin in the series of studies used to dismiss concerns aboutthimerosal and MMR causing autism.

See SAFEMINDS analysis of Thorsen’s role in the discredited studies here:
http://www.safeminds.org/news/pressroom/press_releases/20040518_AutismAuthorsNetwork.pdf

See the Copenhagen Post Online article at:
http://www.cphpost.dk/news/international/89-international/48229-researcher-accused-of-cheating-uni-out-of-millions.html

See the statement from Aarhus Universityhttp://www.rescuepost.com/files/thorsen-aarhus.pdf

The two studies now in doubt include:

Thimerosal and the occurrence of autism: negative ecological evidencefrom Danish population-based data.Madsen KM, Lauritsen MB, Pedersen CB, Thorsen P, Plesner AM, Andersen PH, Mortensen PB, Pediatrics. 2003 Sep;112(3 Pt 1):604-6.

A population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism. Madsen KM, Hviid A, Vestergaard M, Schendel D, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, Olsen J, Melbye M.,
N Engl J Med. 2002 Nov 7;347(19):1477-82.

From my friend Dr. Mercola (of Chicago fame):

CDC Doctor who “Debunked” Vaccine-Autism Link Indicted on Fraud

Another shocking case involving the CDC is that of Dr. Poul Thorsen, who, after being found to have falsified documents, was indicted on fraud, money laundering and tax evasion after stealing somewhere between $1-2 million in research grant money from the CDC.

Here you might wonder why I’m faulting the CDC, as the organization was the victim of fraud. The reason I fault them is because they hired Dr. Thorsen to debunk the link between thimerosal in vaccines and autism—which he did to their satisfaction. However, CDC officials may have played a significant role in “guiding” this research to their desired end, and now that Thorsen has been exposed as a fraud, the agency still upholds his research as being of high caliber.

As explained in a 2010 article by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.:

“Thorsen was a leading member of a Danish research group that wrote several key studies supporting CDC’s claims that the MMR vaccine and mercury-laden vaccines were safe for children. Thorsen’s 2003 Danish study reported a 20-fold increase in autism in Denmark after that country banned mercury based preservatives in its vaccines. His study concluded that mercury could therefore not be the culprit behind the autism epidemic.

His study has long been criticized as fraudulent since it failed to disclose that the increase was an artifact of new mandates requiring, for the first time, that autism cases be reported on the national registry. This new law and the opening of a clinic dedicated to autism treatment in Copenhagen accounted for the sudden rise in reported cases rather than, as Thorsen seemed to suggest, the removal of mercury from vaccines.

Despite this obvious chicanery, CDC has long touted the study as the principal proof that mercury-laced vaccines are safe for infants and young children. Mainstream media, particularly the New York Times, has relied on this study as the basis for its public assurances that it is safe to inject young children with mercury — a potent neurotoxin — at concentrations hundreds of times over the U.S. safety limits.”

Were CDC Officials in on the Fraud?

Emails released in response to FOIA filings by parents also show that Kreesten Madsen, one of Dr. Thorsen’s research partners, had acquiesced to the wishes of CDC officials who wanted to cherry pick facts in order to prove vaccine safety. Furthermore, according to an April 28 report by Natural News:

“From February 2004 through June 2008, says the DOJ indictment, Thorsen allegedly submitted over a dozen fraudulent invoices requesting reimbursement for expenses that were fabricated. Interestingly, these allegedly fraudulent invoices were signed by a laboratory section chief at the CDC, indicating that someone inside the CDC was either duped by Thorsen or potentially involved in the alleged fraud.

This is the great untold story of an alleged criminal ring operating inside the CDC, with the purpose of falsifying research that would “disprove” any links between vaccines and toxic side effects.”

Why Does the CDC Not Invalidate Dr. Thorsen’s Research?

Dr. Thorsen’s studies are frequently quoted in rebuttals to the claim that vaccines may play a role in the disorder. The studies in question were riddled with flaws, yet despite the fact that Thorsen’s studies may actually be a complete sham, the CDC has not officially declared them invalid. In fact, they’re still listed on the CDC website as part of the scientific backing of their stance on autism and vaccine safety.

Nor has the media jumped on this story and exposed how vaccine-safety claims have been based on junk science by a scam artist. They’ve also failed to question why none of the journals have denounced Dr. Thorsen’s studies, which support the claim that vaccines are safe, while Dr. Wakefield’s research was denounced after the mere insinuation of wrong-doing.

Furthermore, according to research by Dan Olmsted and Mark Blaxill writing for AgeOfAutism.com, Dr. Thorsen has also been working with the American Psychiatric Association (APA) on an updated definition of “autism” for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), which is slated for release in May 2013. I believe it would be prudent to take a deeper look at his input, to make sure his connections to the CDC and his role in protecting vaccine safety has not tainted the new definition of autism.

The sad fact is that conflicts of interest color most of the ties between our government and the pharmaceutical industry, and conventional media repeatedly fails to report the truth on these matters.

So, who can you trust?

I would recommend trusting yourself. Do your own research, and make your own decisions accordingly. The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is an excellent resource on all things relating to the controversial topic of vaccines. They have been compiling objective evidence showing both sides of the issue and have been one of the strongest voices for vaccine safety and true informed consent.

EXPERTS SUGGEST THAT SMALLPOX VACCINE WOULD PROTECT AGAINST HIV.

2010 (June). The smallpox vaccine could protect people against HIV infection, said an article released in the journal BMC Immunology.According to the publication, researchers from George Mason University, George Washington and UCLA in Los Angeles, USA, showed that in the laboratory the vaccinia virus, the basis of the vaccine reduced the replication of HIV.It appears that the compound blocks a receptor, called CCR5, on the surface of white blood cells, the same as the HIV virus uses to infect cells.However, more studies are needed before recommending the general use of the immunogen in the fight against AIDS.After the disappearance of the disease in 1977 (first eradicated throughout the world), the World Health Organization recommended removing the vaccine, something that happened in the same period of time when HIV and AIDS was discovered.Hence, the researcher suggest that the biological removal may have been the cause of the rapid spread of HIV in Africa. Several explanations were given on how HIV spread in the black continent, including wars, use of unsterilized needles and the contamination of polio vaccines, said Raymond Weinstein, author of the work.But no theory has been able to determine the behavior of the pandemic, he said.“Our finding that previous immunization with vaccinia virus can give a person some protection against subsequent HIV infection suggests that the withdrawal of this vaccine may have been the explanation for the rapid spread of HIV in Africa” Weinstein concluded .

Did the End of Smallpox Vaccination Cause the Explosive Spread of HIV?ScienceDaily (May 18, 2010) — Vaccinia immunization, as given to prevent the spread of smallpox, produces a five-fold reduction in HIV replication in the laboratory. Researchers writing in the open access journal BMC Immunology suggest that the end of smallpox vaccination in the mid-20th century may have caused a loss of protection that contributed to the rapid contemporary spread of HIV.See Also:Health & MedicineHIV and AIDSInfectious DiseasesVirusesPlants&AnimalsVirologyBiologyGeneticsReferenceVaccinationFlu vaccineHPV vaccineMMR vaccine

Raymond Weinstein, a family doctor turned laboratory scientist at George Mason University, Manassas, Virginia, worked with a team of researchers from George Washington University and UCLA. The researchers looked at the ability of white blood cells taken from people recently immunized with vaccinia to support HIV replication compared to unvaccinated controls. They found significantly lower viral replication in blood cells from vaccinated individuals.Weinstein said, “There have been several proposed explanations for the rapid spread of HIV in Africa, including wars, the reuse of unsterilized needles and the contamination of early batches of polio vaccine. However, all of these have been either disproved or do not sufficiently explain the behavior of the HIV pandemic. Our finding that prior immunization with vaccinia virus may provide an individual with some degree of protection to subsequent HIV infection suggests that the withdrawal of such vaccination may be a partial explanation.”Smallpox immunization was gradually withdrawn from the 1950s to the 1970s following the worldwide eradication of the disease, and HIV has been spreading exponentially since approximately the same time period. Weinstein and his colleagues propose that vaccination may confer protection against HIV by producing long term alterations in the immune system, possibly including the expression of a certain receptor, CCR5, on the surface of a person’s white blood cells which is exploited by both viruses.Speaking about the results, Weinstein said, “While these results are very interesting and hopefully may lead to a new weapon against the HIV pandemic, they are very preliminary and it is far too soon to recommend the general use of vaccinia immunization for fighting HIV.”Email or share this story:|MoreStory Source:Adapted from materials provided by BioMed Central, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.Journal Reference:Raymond S Weinstein, Michael M Weinstein, Kenneth Alibek, Michael I Bukrinsky and Brichacek Beda. Significantly Reduced CCR5-tropic HIV-1 Replication in vitro in Cells from Subjects Previously Immunized with Vaccinia Virus. BMC Immunology, 2010; (in press)

Flashback to 1987. Despite these claims that the end of smallpox vaccination of Africans caused the AIDS epidemic, can you remember what was written at the beginning of the AIDS era? In case you are unaware of this information, I have provided it here (and not in 1987 where it would go along the timeline:

London TimesEdition 1 MON 11 MAY 1987 Smallpox vaccine ‘triggered Aids virus’ BY PEARCE WRIGHT, SCIENCE EDITOR

The Aids epidemic may have been triggered by the mass vaccination campaign which eradicated smallpox. The World Health Organization, which masterminded the 13-year campaign, is studying new scientific evidence suggesting that immunization with the smallpox vaccine Vaccinia awakened the unsuspected, dormant human immuno defence virus infection (HIV).(Article presented in its entirety before-see 1987). (Look at the 1987 entry on the timeline in its entirety (in the year 1987).

2011 Feds urge churches to peddle flu shots to members, partner with drug stores to sponsor flu clinics.

December’s new pharma initiative aim is to use religious leaders and institutions to increase flu vaccine compliance. And in order to ensure success, HHS held a private conference call recently—no press allowed-to discuss strategies.

Faith and community leaders play an intregal role in helping to keep their communities and congregations healthy, especially during flu season, “ says the HHS announcment. As trusted messengers (religious leaders) are able to spread important information about health practices and the need for vaccination.

Thus, the federal government and its pawns in state and local governments get a little bit more aggressive in their push for full compliance with the flu vaccine agenda. And this year, they are targeting faith-based groups and the leaders of such groups, which include pastors, priests, rabbis, and imams – to promote flu vaccines to their members during religious services, and even to partner with local drug stores to hold flu vaccine clinics.

You can find the full HHS announcment here December 13, 2011 by Ethan A. Huff, Staff Writer , Natural News. In a recent issue of the US Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) Partnership Center Newsletter, the agency wrote about its new Seasonal Flu Guide for Community & Faith-based Organizations and Leaders.
http://www.hhs.gov/partnerships/res

2011Dr. Kimberly Quinlan Lindsey, and her CDC security guard boyfriend, has been arrested and charged only last week with two counts of alleged child molestation and one count of alleged animal bestiality. This is a troublesome issue because Lindsey is deputy director for the Laboratory Science Policy and Practice Program Office, former senior health scientist in the Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response, an office that oversaw the allocation process for $1.5 billion in terrorism preparedness, and which led the sham 2009 H1N1 vaccine debacle, as well as a person who pushed a dangerous vaccine that increased the risk of narcolepsy by 900 percent in children and adolescents below the age of 19, and which was linked with abnormally high rates of miscarriage and stillbirths. Her involvement with the CDC’s AIDS program is even more horrifying. Are these the kind of people who have the health of our children as their first priority?

Again, from my friend, Dr. Mercola of Chicago fame:

Dr. Kimberly Quinlan Lindsey, a top official with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been arrested and charged with two counts of child molestation and one count of bestiality.

Dr. Lindsey, who joined the CDC in 1999, is currently the deputy director for the Laboratory Science Policy and Practice Program Office. She’s second in command of the program office.

Prior to that role, she was the senior health scientist in the Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response, an office that oversees the allocation process for $1.5 billion in terrorism preparedness.

According to CNN:

“Authorities also charged Lindsey’s live-in boyfriend, Thomas Joseph Westerman, 42, with two counts of child molestation.

The two are accused of ‘immoral and indecent’ sexual acts involving a 6-year-old …

The bestiality charge says Lindsey ‘did unlawfully perform or submit to any sexual act with an animal.'”

Between January and August last year, Dr. Lindsey and her boyfriend allegedly involved the child during sex, and DeKalb County police claim they discovered photographs of Lindsey performing sex acts on a couple of her pets.

Some of you may wonder why I’ve chosen to discuss this story. Some may think it’s in poor taste and doesn’t belong in a newsletter about health. However, I believe it’s relevant to be aware that someone in charge of your child’s health is allegedly engaged in child abuse. Her actions raise serious questions in my mind about her level of concern for the health and well-being of children in general.

Dr. Lindsey Played Primary Role in Bogus Swine Flu Propaganda Campaign

As you may recall, the 2009 H1N1 swine flu pandemic turned out to be a complete sham, with a fast-tracked and particularly dangerous vaccine being pushed as the sole remedy. Children and pregnant women were the primary targets of this dangerous vaccine. The H1N1 flu was a perfect example of how the CDC can brazenly distort reality, and often ignore and deny the dangerous and life-threatening side effects of their solution. As a result of this bogus propaganda campaign, thousands of people were harmed (and many died) worldwide.

In August, it was revealed that the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine increased the risk for narcolepsy—a very rare and devastating sleeping disorder—in Swedish children and adolescents by 660 percent.

Finland also noticed a dramatic increase in narcolepsy following vaccination with Pandemrix. There, an interim report issued in January of this year found that the H1N1 vaccine increased the risk of narcolepsy by 900 percent in children and adolescents below the age of 19. In the US, the H1N1 flu vaccine was statistically linked with abnormally high rates of miscarriage and stillbirths. As reported by Steven Rubin on the NVIC’s blog, the US H1N1 flu vaccine was SIXTY times more likely to be reported to VAERS to be associated with miscarriage than previous seasonal flu vaccines.

The only “winners” in this game were the pharmaceutical companies that received millions of dollars for this never-proven-effective and highly reactive vaccine, while being sheltered by our government from liability for any harm it caused.

Dr. Lindsey played an important role in that campaign, which ended in tragedy for countless many—not from a killer flu (statistically, the 2009 H1N1 flu was MILDER than usual) but from the dangerous and expensive “remedy” to this oversold non-threat.

All of that said, I do want to stress that Dr. Lindsey has not yet been found guilty, and there are still many unanswered questions relating to this case. But this is not the only shocking story raising questions about the ethics of those involved in creating the CDC’s health recommendations.

From 1995’s Congressional Record regarding at that time the failure of the first 30 Human “HIV” vaccine trials, due to what was called, Original Antigenic Sin (OAS).

“HIV infection induces an abundance of antibodies, including neutralizing antibodies (neutralizing antibodies are those antibodies that inactivate “HIV”): however, several groups have shown that the generation of neutralizing antibodies tends to lag behind the generation of viral escape mutants by several months or even years (DAMN SNEEKY MUTANTS AGAIN)! One explanation for this observation involves the phenomenon of original antigenic sin (OAS), the fixing of an immune response in a non-adaptive pattern.”

When exposed to HIV, however, vaccinated individuals exhibiting OAS may be no worse off than unvaccinated individuals because unvaccinated individuals also have a lag in generation of antibody to HIV because their immune response has not been “primed” by vaccination. It is not known whether the lag in antibody production in unvaccinated individuals is greater than the lag in the production of antibody directed by contemporaneous HIV strains in vaccinated individuals exhibiting OAS.”

Vaccine-induced OAS may occur when a vaccinated individual is exposed to a non-cross-reactive strain of HIV that induces the production of antibodies specific for the vaccine strain that are unable to neutralize the newly encountered strain.”

Translation: Did you get that, dear reader? Original (antigenic) sin sometimes may occur in “HIV” vaccine trials in either experimental or placebo groups because the antigen(s) injected are different than the antigens that supposedly make up “HIV” and because there is a lag time in antibody production. It should be clearly noted in this context, however, that this explanation by the AIDS vaccinologists makes as much sense as the story that “original antigenic sin” is God’s punishment for seeking the knowledge of good and evil through vaccine experimentation on human beings. It should be recalled that after Adam and Eve realized they were naked, God decided to push his children out of the sterility of Eden. Because he loved them, God decided to protect his children from the vile germs of the world he had created on the second day, by vaccinating them. In his divine wisdom, God provided Adam and Eve with “a choice,” which is why God sent his servant, The Snake (the vaccination devil) to tempt Eve to either receive the vaccine poison from the snake’s bite, or as with Sabin’s sugar cubes, to receive the poison orally after putting it into The Apple. Although the serpent’s bite was meant to hurt to remind all of the generations of Adam and Eve of their fundamental sinful, vile, germ-ridden wretched nature, redness and tenderness only occurred at the snake-bite injection site. God’s vaccine worked so well that in all the generations of Adam and Eve (who were related genetically), molecular mimicry did not occur, and, thus demyelination syndromes, peripheral neuropathies, Crohn’s disease, arthritis, shingles, seizures, insulin-dependent diabetes, autism spectrum disorders, and other adverse reactions did not occur in the many generations that followed. And God saw that it was good. Also, unlike today’s vaccines, there were no impurities in God’s vaccine such as the following list on WAVE’s website presents-“World Association of Vaccine Education: (http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/)..

It should be emphasized here that squalene (MF-59) among other adjuvants, toxins, fixatives, antibiotics, neurotoxic metals, and other compounds listed above, has been used in “HIV” vaccines to “boost” the immune system non-specifically [1]. Unfortunately, the same substance is used in arthritis research, and in animal models of other autoimmune diseases to cause those diseases. There also is evidence that adjuvants like squalene (MF-59), when they have been added to certain lots of anthrax (and perhaps “HIV”) vaccines given to soldiers on threat of court martial if they don’t roll up their shirt on command [2], have induced autoimmune syndromes in almost 100% of every sick Gulf-War I veteran tested, and have evoked antibodies to squalene in their blood [3,4]. This type of promising vaccine experimentation on our young soldiers who are spreading democracy and freedom throughout the world is particularly disturbing in light of the fact that squalene and other adjuvants have been used by scientists for many years to induce rodents to develop arthritis, macrophagic myofasciitis, mutliple-sclerosis (demyelinating syndromes), and lupus [5, 6].

Finally, “original antigenic sin, if it is a distinct and important immunological mechanism that accounts for vaccine trial failures, should not be confused with past suggested mechanisms as “antigenic shift” that also have been proposed to account for past vaccine trial failures. For instance, the phrase “antigenic shift” was used to describe the failure of the flu vaccine to protect soldiers entering World War II:

1941 “On the eve of US entry into World War II, concern about a repeat of the 1918 influenza pandemic and its effect on armed forces led the US military to establish the Commission on Influenza (later combined with other commissions to become the present Armed Forces Epidemiological Board) and place high priority on developing a vaccine (Woodward TE, editor. The histories of the commissions. Washington: Office of The Surgeon General; 1992). Pandemic influenza did not materialize, but the vaccine did. The first successful large-scale influenza vaccine field trials were completed in 1943 (Francis T. Vaccination against influenza. In: World Health Organization. Influenza, a review of current research. Geneva: The Organization; 1954. p. 689–740). In 1947, failure of the vaccine to provide protection against the epidemic influenza type A antigenic variant confirmed concerns of vaccine obsolescence and led to the term “antigenic shift” (von Magnus P. The influenza virus: its morphology, immunology, and kinetics of multiplication. Bull World Health Organ. 1953;8:647–60) and designation of the 1947 FM1 strain by the Commission on Influenza as subgroup A´ on the basis of the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test).

Question: Is this hemagglutination inhibition test or its interpretation infallible and specific only for flu viruses?

As a slight digression, it is an interesting historical fact that the 1918 “Spanish Flu” epidemic, like AIDS, affected men in the prime of their lives, and at a 1/4th higher rate among new military recruits than civilians, but how could the virus “know?” In this context, The Pandemic of Influenza in 1918-1919 prepared by the US Department of Health, Education and Welfare Public Health Service National Office of Vital Statistics indicated that:

“the extraordinary feature of ‘the Great Spanish flu’ was that it attacked young people in the prime of life unlike any other epidemics recorded.” (Except AIDS)?

“When appropriate adjustments are made for differences in the age and sex distribution of military and civilian populations, it appears that the death rate was about one-fourth higher in the Army than in the civilian population of the United States

The relatively high mortality in young adults in 1918 and the 2 years immediately following seems to have been characteristic of that period and was not found in epidemics prior to or subsequent to this 3-year period.”

Moreover, in these contexts, one might ask why there isn’t a deeper sense of gratitude toward the scientific instincts and second great contribution of another one of Donald Rumsfeld’s companies (a separate venture from Searle described earlier, Gilead Biosciences, who have made and promoted the drug Tamiflu to protect the world currently from “Bird Flu,” which we have been told is a mutant from “The Great Spanish Flu pandemic,” and who also now market the new AIDS drug atripola that outsold all other AIDS drugs last year-but more about that later:

US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld served as Gilead (Research)’s chairman from 1997 until he joined the Bush administration in 2001, and he still holds a Gilead stake valued at between $5 million and $25 million, according to federal financial disclosures filed by Rumsfeld. The forms don’t reveal the exact number of shares Rumsfeld owns. Gilead made a loss in 2003, the year before concern about bird flu started. Then revenues from Tamiflu almost quadrupled, from $35 to $44.6m, helping put the company well into the black. Sales almost quadrupled again, to $161.6m in 2005. Mr Rumsfeld sold some of his Gilead shares in 2004 reaping – according to the financial disclosure report he is required to make each year – capital gains of > $5m (£2.9 m)ref. The report showed that he still had up to $25m-worth of shares at the end of 2004. Rumsfeld isn’t the only political heavyweight benefiting from demand for Tamiflu, which is manufactured and marketed by Swiss pharma giant Roche (Gilead receives a royalty from Roche equaling about 10% of sales). Former Secretary of State George Shultz, who is on Gilead’s board, has sold more than $7 million worth of Gilead since the beginning of 2005. Another board member is the wife of former California Gov. Pete Wilson. In July, the Pentagon ordered $58 million worth of the treatment for U.S. troops around the world, and Congress is considering a multi-billion dollar purchase. Rumsfeld recused himself from any decisions involving Gilead when he left Gilead and became Secretary of Defense in early 2001( http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/31/news/newsmakers/fortune_rumsfeld/index.htm).

REFERENCES

1. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00000972

2. Gary Matsumoto. Vaccine A, The Covert Government Experiment That’s Killing Our Soldiers. Basic Books Publisher, 2005.

3. P. B. Asa et al., Exp. Mol. Pathol 68, 196-197, 2000.

4. Asa PB, Wilson RB, Garry RF. Antibodies to squalene in recipients of anthrax vaccine. Exp Mol Pathol. Aug;73(1):19-27, 2002.

5. Holmdahl et al. Arthritis induced in rats with nonimmunogenic adjuvants as models for rheumatoid arthritis Immunol Rev. Dec;184:184-202, 2001.

6. Gherardi NK. Lessons from macrophagic myofasciitis: towards definition of a vaccine adjuvant-related syndrome. Rev Neurol (Paris). Feb;159(2):162-4), 2003.

2012 Polio Vaccines Now The #1 cause of Polio Paralysis ( Polio Vaccines Now The #1 Cause of Polio Paralysis -link).

Sayer Ji, Contributing Writer

The Polio Global Eradication Initiative (PGEI), founded in 1988 by the World Health Organization, Rotary International, UNICEF, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, holds up India as a prime example of its success at eradicating polio, stating on its website (Jan. 11 2012) that “India has made unprecedented progress against polio in the last two years and on 13 January, 2012, India will reach a major milestone — a 12-month period without any case of polio being recorded.”

This report, however, is highly misleading, as an estimated 100-180 Indian children are diagnosed with vaccine-associated polio paralysis (VAPP) each year. In fact, the clinical presentation of the disease, including paralysis, caused by VAPP is indistinguishable from that caused by wild polioviruses, making the PGEI’s pronouncements all the more suspect.1

According to the Polio Global Eradication Initiative’s own statistics2 there were 42 cases of wild-type polio (WPV) reported in India in 2010, indicating that vaccine-induced cases of polio paralysis (100-180 annually) outnumber wild-type cases by a factor of 3-4. Even if we put aside the important question of whether or not the PGEI is accurately differentiating between wild and vaccine-associated polio cases in their statistics, we still must ask ourselves: should not the real-world effects of immunization, both good and bad, be included in PGEI’s measurement of success? For the dozens of Indian children who develop vaccine-induced paralysis every year, the PGEI’s recent declaration of India as nearing “polio free” status, is not only disingenuous, but could be considered an attempt to minimize their obvious liability in having transformed polio from a natural disease vector into a man-made (iatrogenic) one.

VAPP is, in fact, the predominant form of the disease in developed countries like the US since 1973.3  The problem of vaccine-induced polio paralysis was so severe that the The United States moved to the inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) in 2000, after the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended altogether eliminating the live-virus oral polio vaccine (OPV), which is still used throughout the third world, despite the known risks.

Polio underscores the need for a change in the way we look at so-called “vaccine preventable” diseases as a whole. In most people with a healthy immune system, a poliovirus infection does not even generate symptoms. Only rarely does the infection produce minor symptoms, e.g. sore throat, fever, gastrointestinal disturbances, and influenza-like illness. In only 3% of infections does virus gain entry to the central nervous system, and then, in only 1-5 in 1000 cases does the infection progress to paralytic disease.

Due to the fact that polio spreads through the fecal-oral route (i.e. the virus is transmitted from the stool of an infected person to the mouth of another person through a contaminated object, e.g. utensil) focusing on hygiene, sanitation and proper nutrition (to support innate immunity) is a logical way to prevent transmission in the first place, as well as reducing morbidity associated with an infection when it does occur.

Instead, a large portion of the world’s vaccines are given to the Third World as “charity,” when the underlying conditions of economic impoverishment, poor nutrition, chemical exposures, and socio-political unrest are never addressed. You simply can’t vaccinate people out of these conditions, and as India’s new epidemic of vaccine-induced polio cases clearly demonstrates, the “cure” may be far worse than the disease itself.

1 Cono J, Alexander LN (2002). “Chapter 10: Poliomyelitis” (PDF). Vaccine-Preventable Disease Surveillance Manual.
2 http://www.polioeradication.org/Dataandmonitoring/Poliothisweek.aspx
3 Strebel PM, Sutter RW, Cochi SL, et al. Epidemiology of poliomyelitis in the United States one decade after the last reported case of indigenous wild virus-associated disease. Clin Infect Dis 1992;14:568-79.

2012 January 25,http://sanevax.org/premature-babies-used-as-lab-rats-in-manipulated-vaccine-trials/ Premature Babies Used As Lab Rats In Manipulated Vaccine Trials By Christina England

While reading the results of a vaccination trial on premature babies funded by GlaxoSmithKline, I noticed something was not quite right.

The trial, whilst sickening in itself, was testing out the rotavirus vaccine on a group of 988 premature babies ranging between 27 weeks and 36 weeks.

The paper reporting the trial was published on the ‘Pediatric SuperSite’ and was entitled ‘Human rotavirus immunogenic, well-tolerated for preterm infants’ by Felix Omenaca MD. PhD, and colleagues (1) The paper stated the following:

The researchers grouped preterm infants by ages — infants born at gestational ages 27 to 30 weeks and those born at 30 to 36 weeks. They administered rotavirus vaccine (RIX4414, GlaxoSmithKline) in two doses to 658 preterm infants, and 330 received a placebo along with routine vaccinations, including diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type B and poliovirus. Infants from France and Spain also received Streptococcus pneumoniae concomitantly; infants from Portugal and Spain also received Neisseria meningitides.

The researchers then asked parents/guardians to report adverse effects, and they noted no statistically significant difference in the reporting of severe adverse reactions in the vaccine or placebo group (5.1% and 6.2%, respectively). Unsolicited adverse effects, which included fever of more than 39.5·C, six or more bouts of diarrhea per day, three or more episodes of vomiting per day, appetite loss and irritability, were reported in 29.3% of preterm infants in the vaccine group and 40.7% in the placebo group. (own emphasis)

The problems I see are as follows:

  1. All the infants were given multiple vaccinations, therefore, there was no control group.

  2. Of a group of 988 children, approx 2/3 were given the vaccine for rotavirus and 1/3 were given the placebo, then the researchers compared the results like for like. This cannot be done because one group is significantly larger than the other.

  3. Because all of the infants received multiple vaccinations it is impossible to tell which vaccine if any caused the side effects.

The Attack On Pregnant Mothers Escalates, by Suzanne Humphries, MD

Internation Medical Council on Vaccination

February 29, 2012

Obstetricians and primary care physicians throughout the world will no-doubt be lauding the result of a recent publication, “Neonatal outcomes after influenza immunization during pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial,” which can be downloaded free at the time of this publication HERE, and the abstract can be viewed HERE. This study will be cited by doctors, advisory panels, and pharmaceutical drug reps. as they work to increase vaccination rates and sales using pregnant mothers as receptacles.

Expectant mothers will be told that getting a flu shot while they are pregnant is not only safe, but will protect from one of the possible consequences of influenza while pregnant – low birth weight.

How many doctors will ever read the abstract, let alone the full text? In the hectic environment of medical practice, they will take someone else’s word for it, and reassure unsuspecting mothers that the vaccine is the way to go.

There are several serious problems with this study, the least of which is that it was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation and several pharmaceutical companies. Bill did, after all declare this the “decade of vaccination,” after delivering a check in the amount of 10 Billion dollars to make it happen. Much of his donation is hitting India and Africa in order to purchase oral polio vaccines and vaccine delivery trucks to reach remote villages. Now, influenza vaccines for pregnant mothers is on the way into the pipeline. Rumor has it that he is a candidate for a NOBEL PRIZE, for providing millions of infants and children with live oral polio vaccines. Well, it seems the fetus is now on his radar and this new article displays the misinformation typical of the rally to inject pregnant mothers with untested vaccines. This article references the main study, which was also funded by his foundation.

Before too many doctors take the infotainment in this study at face value, let’s review some of the issues in design and interpretation.

Problem number one: This study is headlined as a “randomized controlled trial.” Most unsuspecting doctors, upon seeing the title will think that this study met bench-mark gold-standard design criteria for validity. After all, we’ve been told that the best way to test an intervention is through this type of study.

By definition, a randomized controlled trial is: A study design that randomly assigns participants into an experimental group or a control group. As the study is conducted, the only expected difference between the control and experimental groups in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the outcome variable being studied. The variables being studied should be the only variables between the experimental group and the control group.

The problem with calling this study ‘controlled’ has to do with what is used as the control. Hold onto your hats folks, because you are going to love this…the control injection for the other half of this study population was a 23-valent pneumococcal vaccine given to mothers in their third trimester. This is the period of gestation when heart valves, thyroid, adrenal glands, muscles, lungs, brain, eyes and nervous systems are maturing, and testicles are descending. By now most of us are not shocked, because this is part-and-parcel with the smoke-and-mirrors pseudo-science of vaccinology, and the integrity of those involved.

The other question is, is there a ‘variable’ between the two groups? If both groups are being vaccinated, how can the difference be assessed, in terms of safety, adverse outcomes, and protection from infection? They are comparing granny smith to golden delicious, where in a controlled study, the idea is to compare apples to no-apples.

So to summarize, there were 340 pregnant women in the study, done by – get this…”the Mother’s Gift project.” Half of the mothers in their third trimester received an inactivated influenza vaccine and the other half received a 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine as the “control.” Hopefully, by now you are starting to get annoyed. If not, keep reading. Then…after delivery, the infants were injected with either a Hib vaccine or a 23-valent pneumococcal vaccine, in addition to the usual childhood vaccination schedule at 6, 10, and 14 weeks.

Problem number two: The study was, for some reason done in Bangladesh, and it was a secondary analysis of data generated from the ORIGINAL STUDY to evaluate the immunogenicity of pneumococcal vaccination on pregnant mothers and infants.

At baseline, almost a quarter of babies (24%) in Bangladesh are born with LOW BIRTH WEIGHT. In contrast, in the USA approximately 8.2% of pregnancies result in low birth weight. In the developing world, low birth weight stems from deficiencies in maternal health and nutrition, and only rarely – from influenza infections. There is no Bangladesh-specific reference for gestational age, so… the authors note, “we used a North American standard.” Most thoughtful people would consider that Bangladeshi infants are overall smaller than American, European, Canadian etc. infants, and that a standard used on them ought to be their own, not a North American standard. Granted, as of 2011, Bangladesh has a very high INFANT MORTALITY RATE, ranked at number 47, compared to 167 in the USA. Bangladesh is the eighth most populous country in the world and, after only a few microstates and small island nations, has the highest population density. In such a densely populated country, it should be easy to enroll enough mothers to have a true control group, don’t you think? It seems to me that there are far more benevolent and effective means to help the Bangladeshis, especially given that we know nothing of the longer-term effects on the child for these vaccines – and that nobody is planning to look.

Are you thinking what I’m thinking…? “Why don’t Bill and Melinda spill billions of dollars into improving living conditions and implementing programs that would assure sustainable nutrition, clean water, and sanitation in the third world, rather than vaccinating anything with two legs?” So now, what do you think of generalizing these results to the rest of the world?

There are some other noteworthy issues in this study. Namely, it states that there were NO differences in the numbers of stillbirths between the groups. But clearly listed in Figure 1, there were 3 stillbirths in the influenza-vaccinated group and none in the pneumococcal-vaccinated group. That’s three stillbirths out of 172 or 1.7 percent. In addition, there were eight infants excluded from data evaluation in the influenza group and one in the pneumococcal group. As always, I must wonder why these infants were excluded and what the data would look like with that 4.6% of infants included.

Apparently, the marvelous effect of the influenza vaccine was not profound enough just looking at the pneumococcal vs. influenza vaccines, so they further divided the groups by influenza season vs. non-season, thus shrinking the final comparison group down to 58 infants. In the analysis of the groups during influenza season, the results showed a mean birth weight of 3178 g in the influenza vaccine group, which was a whopping 7% higher than 2978 g in the control (pneumococcal vaccinated) group. But here’s the kicker; low birth weight in USA is considered less than 2500 g, so the mean in this sham-study group (influenza) didn’t even meet the criteria for low birth weight. But rest assured, this vaccine will be offered, probably along with the 23-valent pneumococcal vaccine, and vigorously pushed upon pregnant mothers all over the world – with the promise of having a nice big healthy baby. But what of the toddler, or the teenager? Today, the WHO is trying to solve problems regarding MYSTERIOUS DISEASES in children aged 5-15, and they don’t seem to be coming up with any answers. How many of these children do you think have had their immune systems compromised by previous vaccinations? And will the WHO even consider that vaccines could be a contributing factor?

The package insert for influenza vaccine, as it reads now, says:

* Safety and effectiveness have not been established in pregnant women or nursing mothers.

* In a clinical study of children <3 years of age, antibody titers were lower after FLUARIX than after an active comparator.

*There are, however, no adequate and well-controlled studies in pregnant women.

*Because animal reproduction studies are not always predictive of human response, FLUARIX should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.

*In a reproductive and developmental toxicity study, the effect of safety and efficacy have not been established in pregnant women.

AND will stay just as it is. Who reads it anyway, besides a parent after a vaccine has destroyed their child’s life…hopefully in time to protect the next child?

The authors conclude:

The pneumococcal vaccine that was used as a control may have had an independent positive effect on the outcomes among infants. If that were the case, the observed difference between the two vaccine groups would be an underestimate of the true effect of influenza vaccine compared with placebo.”

But that’s an assumption. My question would be, “Did the influenza vaccine increase that baby’s weight or did the pneumococcal vaccine decrease the ‘placebo’ baby’s weight?” If the pneumococcal vaccine had negative effects, then that would minimize the observed effects seen in the influenza-vaccinated group. We’ll never know, unless someone funds a true placebo study, preferably on rats, not pregnant Bangladeshi mothers and their infants.

CONCLUSIONS
We know so little about vaccines and their relationship to epidemics, but there are indeed certain principles that seem to emerge though, by examining this history, other than they don’t work.

1. Epidemics caused by humans are predictable to the extent that vaccine campaigns and epidemics have been frequently associated. Evidence from the 1800’s in the Lancet and from elsewhere shows that the medical profession of that era was aware of this alarming relationship, which is why they tried to stop compulsory vaccination as shown by the British Parliament outlawing the practice. In the 1900’s, much evidence demonstrates that through proper nutrition, sanitation, adequate care of the sick, or lack of war or vaccination, that epidemics can be avoided, and common diseases vanquished. The positive examples that Dr. Tom Spies and others who helped erect our public health system without vaccination during and after the FDR era are numerous (De Kruif, 1949).

2. Vaccination began with a history of the infusion of lymph puss (cells), cellular materials, associated microbes, toxins, and other substances into the human body that are foreign. From a tissue grafting point of view, inoculation was practiced in Persia and elsewhere as an operation where the surface of the body was injured with needles or lancets, and foreign puss from “pox” or perhaps other eruptions similar to pox was made to have contact directly to the bloodstream (or mucus membranes of the nose-as in the case of the Chinese method of smallpox inoculation). This practice suggested moreover, that the smallpox of that era was not particularly frightening with respect to its virulence, although there are reports that natural epidemics carried off 50% of the population during small outbreaks (Crookshank, History and Pathology of Vaccination Vol 1, p 7). In this context, there was intense discussion regarding whether to use year-old puss (dried out from a previous bout of illness, versus obtaining material directly from an ill person). The application of aged versus fresh lymph from a pock probably made quite a difference in the severity of the inoculated disease. Pasteur’s later findings with rabiesvirus are relevant to this claim in that he found that drying of neural tissue infected with highly virulent rabies for at least 10-12 days could attenuate the most virulent (8-day-lethal) strains of that virus and provide immunity in dogs.

3. In a real sense, inoculations, as well as vaccinations (please do not at this point think of them as immunizations!!!!) were and are a complex and dangerous medical procedure, not unlike blood transfusions or liver transplants, and should be regarded as such by the scientific and medical communities, as well as the general public. To exclude even more people from medical insurance and save our astronomical health care debt, on medical questionnaires, next to the box that asks if you have ever had a blood transfusion, organ transplant, or cancer, there should also be a box asking about what vaccines you have had. The infusion of foreign cells such as lymph early during the vaccine era is not unlike the early experiments that revealed graft versus host disease at the beginning of the 1900’s. In graft versus host disease, foreign lymphocytes were infused into mice, and these foreign lymphocytes rejected the host’s lymph nodes first. The Peyer’s patches of the intestines were affected soon after the infusion, as were the cervical, axillary, and inguinal lymph nodes of the neck, arm-pit, and groin, followed by massive rejection of the recipient’s tissues, followed by extreme morbidity and death in >50% of the recipients, depending upon their genetic background. In the context of vaccination, history suggests that it should never be forgotten that one is attempting to alter the entire immune system and its future responses to the universe of antigens. Although intact and living eukaryotic cells are no longer infused, their components are, and some of these components can evoke massive responses of the immune system.

4. Pasteur was challenged to give an anthrax vaccine demonstration that was very well documented before the Agricultural Society of Melun, at the farm of Pouilly-le-Fort. On Europe’s most famous horse doctors, human doctors, animal breeders, senators, reporters from the San Francisco Chronicle and London Times, farmers, and scientists anxiously waited, and watched, as 24 out of 24 anthrax-inoculated sheep grazed happily next to a row of 22 out of 24 dead ones, because the 22/24 dead ones weren’t pre-vaccinated with Pasteur’s anthrax vaccine before they were challenged with live anthrax. The promise of this experiment alone deserves support for continued intensive experimental research (on animals), but by no means signals the wholesale and wanton experimentation on humans at this point. These accomplishments remain intriguing for the experimentalists, but should not constitute carte blanche permission to try out in humans a medical procedure that may alter the entire immune system. A medical intervention such as vaccination, although usually harmless to most individuals, is extremely harmful to some groups of people, and in so doing, lacks a predictable outcome, not to mention a sound theoretical and empirical foundation. When ten million vaccinations are given, however, the so-called sensitive group(s) can amount to tens or even hundreds of thousands.

5. Soldiers (young adults) have always been the best victims for vaccine experimentation, and war efforts have always been associated with epidemic disease, and in recent times, with mandatory vaccination and revaccination. Thus, the negotiating tongue, rather than the poisoned needle, would go far in preventing epidemics such as the 1918 “Spanish Flu,” or “Gulf-War Syndrome.” Next in the hierarchy of human guinea pigs have been unsuspecting new parents, who would do anything authorities told them to do to protect their cherubs. Blacks, gay persons, and those groups deemed to be impoverished, inferior, prisoners, or handicapped, have also been extensively used as victims of vaccinology.

6. Similar problems have been associated with vaccines both before and after the molecular era. For instance, contamination has always been an issue. Early vaccinologists in the middle 1800’s were afraid that diseases such as leprosy were transmitted through cuts caused by the vaccinator’s lancet in regions of the world such as Hawaii, where lymph was derived from potentially leprosy-bearing peoples, and there is some evidence from the middle to late 1800’s to support the idea that in some instances, smallpox vaccination caused outbreaks of both leprosy and syphilis, as well as out breaks of other diseases. Similarly, vaccinologists in the middle of the 1900’s, were afraid that the Salk and Sabin vaccines were contaminated with SV40, the so-called simian virus that was shown to be capable of causing mesotheliomas, lymphomas, brain tumors, and other cancers in animals. During the “polio era” this fear accounted for published statements suggesting that “The Soviets would lose the 1964 Olympics because their athletes would all have tumors thanks to SV40” (Bookchin and Schumacker, 2004). Even in the 35 year post-polio vaccine mortality studies, initiated because a so called potent cancer-causing virus, SV-40 was inoculated into millions of people, along with the polio virus, has not been long enough to determine if SV-40 is contributing to escalating cancer rates. Indeed, the thirty-five year mortality study on people now in middle age following receipt of SV40-simian-(cancer) virus-contaminated polio vaccine showed that out of 1073 newborns that were vaccinated and carefully followed for 35 years, (which the authors claim is not really long enough) between 1959 and 1963, there was no apparent increase in cancer above the expected background incidences in this carefully followed subgroup (Carroll-Pankhurst et al., British Journal of Cancer 85 (9) 1295-1297, 2001), although others would contest this claim and argue that the polio vaccine has contributed greatly to certain cancer rates, such as lymph cancers.

7. Among the acellular or molecular vaccines, the fear is finally beginning to emerge that the effects of contaminants such as adjuvants like squalene used by vaccinologists to bolster the non-specific immune response can cause autoimmune diseases with high frequency. Yet, these adjuvants are thought to be necessary in modern vaccinology, because it is clear that the molecularly designed vaccines or highly purified components of antigens seldom can be shown to evoke an adequate, or any, immune response on their own, probably because the antigens are too pure, too fragmentary, or they are non-immunogenic because of faulty isolation (as demonstrated by the more than 60 or more so-called “HIV” trails that have completely failed), or too denatured because of harsh reagents used to isolate or purify the various pathogens or their parts, or because the immune system doesn’t really work the way the textbooks say it does (or the way Jenner hypothesized that it does-that a single or even multiple exposures of a foreign substance, organism, or molecular epitope will protect for life). The frequent tetanus vaccines foisted on us at hospitals every few years, despite the fact we constantly are cutting ourselves, or the failure of the hepatitis B vaccine to prevent rather than promote the syndrome in Gambian teenagers, and the increase in polio and smallpox rather than their abatement following near universal vaccination campaigns are all good examples why Mr. Jenner’s hypothesis is not applicable in practice.

8. So-called epidemic diseases have historically been, and continue to be, a hodge-podge of various syndromes and symptoms lumped together under a single name or disease entity.

9. Vaccinology has always been fraught with politics and financial interests. Despite the fact that inoculation was outlawed by the British Parliament in 1840, in 1853 The Compulsory Vaccination Act in England was passed by Parliament and every parent was required to have their baby vaccinated within 3 months of birth or face a fine of 20 shillings. In modern times, we face similar threats that our children won’t be admitted to school unless they are jabbed with the hepatitis B vaccine (a rare syndrome) and whose safety data we have yet to see. The school nurse and Public Health Department, or school admittance policies should not threaten you to believe that you cannot enroll your kid, based on the madness surrounding the possibility that your 5-year-old will transmit a sexual, or needle-borne, or blood-product-transmitted “syndrome” that has a 99% or greater spontaneous resolution rate in otherwise healthy individuals, to someone else’s 5 year old, (when they have sex or shoot heroin in the gym locker-room, or if they share razor blades-are the reasons typically given to support mandatory vaccination) as the pharmaceutical company and Public Health Service logic goes. Currently, parents are being threatened that their daughters have a 70% chance of acquiring cervical cancer if they test “HPV” positive, unless they fork over $300.00 dollars for a series of 3 HPV shots. More frightening and more egregious, and as the co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center recently wrote:

“There is no question that, right now, the fear and hysteria that is being whipped up by politicians and public health officials about bioterrorism in the aftermath of September 11 is paving the way for a serious threat to informed consent to vaccination. The passage of oppressive Emergency Health Powers Acts in the states will allow public health officials to use the state militia to arrest, quarantine and forcibly medicate and vaccinate citizens without their consent. It gives unprecedented power to public health officials who, in some states, will not even have to have a state of emergency declared by the Governor in order to detain and forcibly vaccinate whole families without a court order if they so choose. It is the most serious threat to civil liberties since the Constitution was written…”(Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC).

10. Regarding conflicts of interests and fear-mongering, is it ethical or for the good, that VaxGen, and similar Challenger-sized disasters, be awarded an $877.5 million contract from our tax money to produce and manufacture a new Anthrax vaccine (potentially loaded with squalene or other adjuvants), against a rare disease that Pasteur with his 2 lab technicians and his somewhat limited resources successfully immunized ungulates against over 100 years ago? In this regard, since 9/11, there has been much discussion and even Hollywood movies made regarding the destructive potential of technological achievements such as box-cutters, but little discussion for some reason regarding the source and destructive potential of the weaponized anthrax derived from Utah’s Dugway Proving Ground “found” in the mail of Tom Brokaw and Senator Daschl shortly before the Homeland security vote in the Senate. This could have been a new chapter in the History of Vaccine timeline, but wasn’t.

11. Why are flu shots now being given at Walgreen stores and how are VAERS events reported by these agencies to the government? Only less than about 1-10% of doctors ever report adverse reactions, so who is it at Walgreen or Walmart who will be reporting adverse reactions following this year’s seasonal flu shots?

12. You shouldn’t permit your dogs or cats to get booster vaccinations or according to many veterinarians, or any vaccines, because of the induction of some 160,000 cancers/ year in cats, and a huge disease burdon that vaccines cause in dogs, but it is probably alright to permit your healthy infant or child to obtain 22-58 of them (according to the current schedule) before they leave home. Although it should be stressed that the Pankhurst et al. 35 years study of post-vaccinated infants who received the SV-40-contaminated vaccine has apparently not increased cancer in these Humans, according to her report, although other scientists, like Michele Carbone in Hawaii, and Australian researchers have found the SV-40 sequences in many cancers. Such controversy, however, doesn’t diminish the findings of the Veterinary societies’s findings of various antibodies against normal molecules such as laminin and fibronectin in vaccinated animals harboring a plethora of diseases including cancers. Harold Zur Hausen shows data in his 2008 Nobel acceptance speech for vaccine induction of squamous cell carcinomas and melanomasw in Man.

13. Perhaps the newest idea to hit the Internet, since the information is censored by the mainstream scientific community and not yet published in peer-reviewed journals, is the idea that foreign proteins, adjuvants, and other irritants cause what have been referred to as “ministrokes,” or eschemic episodes. These over-responses of immune cells do to vaccines and adjuvants cause ischemia in M.S., Alzheimers, arthritis, demyelination syndromes, autism spectrum disorders, and after vaccination(s). The principle advocate of this idea is a neurologist and child behavioral analyst, Andrew Moulden and his interesting ideas can be found in an interview of him at:

http://vactruth.com/2009/07/21/dr-andrew-moulden-interview-what-you-were-never-told-about-vaccines/

His ideas are plausible, judging from his non-invasive and impressive collection of brain-imaging studies, if we could only review all of the data, as it is heavily censored and difficult to obtain in the peer-reviewed literature. Moulden essentially argues that irritants such as foreign proteins, adjuvants such as squalene or aluminum, and cellular debris do what they are intended to do: they stimulate an over-response of macrophages, which physically clog up tissue capillaries, rendering them anoxic or ischemic, which lead to a host of different diseases. His hypothesis doesn’t however, account for why there is a range of reactions to vaccines, from redness and swelling at the injection site, to full-blown autism, or as he claims, such diseases as MS, as with the hepatitis B vaccine in France’s experience, which is why they discontinued it after 15,000 citizens filed suit with the Health Minister there.

With modern brain and body non-invasive scanning technologies, Moulden claims to see ischemia in disparate syndromes widely assumed to be cause by different agents or processes. He sees ischemia in demyelination syndromes, MS, Parkinson’s, Alzheimers, autism, arthritis, and others, and he sums up all of these processes to macrophages clogging up capillaries. One thing should be made clear, however, that might escape those who haven’t engineered tissues when he refers to vaccines causing “mini-strokes” versus ischemia.

Strokes are different that ischemia or ischemic tissue. Strokes, considered medically or clinically, are sudden losses of blood flow to an important tissue or region of the body-most easily visualized in neural tissue, leading to the familiar loss of function that is manifest as a sagging lip, face, or arm or leg, due to the fact that innervation to that region has been blocked because the neurons innervating it have died due to ischemia or anoxia. The medical test for strokes in humans is “STR” or the first 3 letters of the word, STROKE. They are a short-hand for asking a disoriented person thought to have had a stroke: “S” for “speak” in a way that makes sense, can you; “T” for tongue-”can you stick out your tonge straight”; and “R” for “raise your arms by your sides the same height, can you?”

Now ischemia, which is Moulden’s real claim as the principal mechanism of vaccine damage, is being detected by his imaging machines in a number of different contexts. He claims to detect it in autism, Alzheimer’s and in a variety of other contexts. He has detected it particularly intensively in MS. These are data I haven’t seen (because I suspect he can’t get them published), but which I will suspend my disbelief in his favor until I do see them. Let’s for a moment assume he sees these ischemic tissues under all these conditions?

It is assumed as the underlying principle of immunology that when foreign substances or artificial immune stimulants like squalene are injected into a recipient’s blood stream, that those substances stimulate an “immune response.” Indeed a bee sting, spider bite, or snake bite, mosquito bite, or vaccine will all cause “swelling and pain and burning” at the bite or injection site. So far so good. These responses are mediated by immediate mechanisms of self-versus non-self INHERENT IN THAT TISSUE WHERE THE SUBSTANCE IS PERFUSED, and the responses can be broken down at the cellular level in different regions of the body by the presence of certain steryotypic cell populations that are recruited at the irritant’s site of entry, which again, may very depending on the route of entry (where the poison is injected).

The immediate response of most tissues (not all) is invariably the same: the body walls off the poison or toxin because of the very breakdown of the homeostatic scaffolding mechanisms that are in place but not active during normal, non-ruptured conditions. When you cut yourself with a knife (for example), the blood vessels are broken open and the platelets, normally not coagulative when exposed to normal endothelium, become “activated” by touching almost anything other than laminin or endothelial cells, and the region becomes “blocked off” or walled off due to the formation of a clot. This in effect begins the ischemic response. In the hours and days following the insult, cells begin to make matrix and a fibrotic response follows. This contributes even more in most cases to ischemia, but normally is self-limiting, as you correctly point out. Eventually, the macrophages will be accumulated near and around the ischemic zone, and will begin to secrete NO, various enzymes such as colllagenase, and matrix matalloproteases, and “remodeling” will begin. Various cells will dump a toxin VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) which is a hypoxic response (due to a lack of O2) which in turn recruits new capillary endothelial cells which then migrate, just like metastastizing tumor cells, through tissue and re-establish a circulation.

The process can be over the course of days, but in special (very special) tissues, it can occur in hours. Such special tissues (like a penis) are somewhat different: when engorged with blood they act as marvelous machines and become able to defy gravity itself, but, as the Viagra commercial correctly says, “if you have an erection lasting more than 4 hours, go see your [lady/man] doctor (to get relief from her/him somehow)?” The “relief” for the problem will not be “given” the way you might think! It is widely held that the engorged vessels in the Viagra-recalcitrant erection that continue un-naturally to remain engorged also cause ischemia as there is little circulation as the blood engorges the millions of little sacks which fill with blood when blood pressure is lowered (from the viagra), and in about 4 hours, the wonderful reproductive organ would begin to turn black and fall of due to gangrene. Therefore heightened blood pressure must be restored as quickly as possible, in order to get flow going again, and O2 to the tissue within the penis. (I just love physiology, and pharmaceuticals don’t you)?

Back to Moulden and his new hypothesis regarding ischemia. He is essentially correct, if his scans show what he says they show. If an adjuvant is given for instance, an artificial stimulation of the non-specific immune responses of T-cells will continue to occur long after the normal, front-line mechanisms would have normally “self-limited” the response of a ruptured tissue. Maulden is right about that…while showing or claiming no data of his own, this is the very reason adjuvants are used since Freund’s first adjuvants were first employed in vaccinology decades ago (and before Freund’s was discontinued because it caused such morbidity in vaccines and was replaced by things such as aluminum as Mouldan also discusses correctly). Therefore, it is entirely possible, that before we even consider the effects of foreign proteins (such as “HIV’s “capsid protein,” P24, and their effects on the immune response), we must consider how adjuvants, bee sting venom, snake venom, mosquito toxin, and the proteins in vaccines all can hijack the normal process of tissue healing after an assault.

In the recent STEP trial, GP120 was used, another so-called “HIV-specific protein, and it caused only 19 out of more than 700 men in one trial, and 22 men or so out of 700 in another trial, to test “HIV” positive, which the trial investigators chalked up to the experimentally vaccinated men’s wild sexual behavior after being vaccinated, without even stopping to consider the absurdity of this claim. In all arms of the trial, the control (placebo) vaccinated had ever so slightly less sero-conversion than the experimentals, but the differences in seroconversion were not in any way statistically significant, similar to the preceding 64 failed “HIV” trails on humans. In other words, all positive signals in both control and experimental groups following experimental and placebo vaccinations, even given in booster series, was due to testing artifact. If you look at similar seroconversion-survey data (which are presented numerous times in the Timeline you just read), you will see seroconversion rates with the feces-derived polio extracts in the region of 90%+ rates of seroconversion for “strain A” and 89% for “strain B” and 80 or so% for “strain C” in multiple trials done in many countries. This is because something, I won’t say a killed virus, but 3 non-self molecular components (strains A,B,C, or chemicals A,B,C,) don’t belong in the vaccine recipients bloodstreams naturally, and therefore over the course of weeks, most of the vaccinated will exhibit seroconversion to the foreign molecules in the ill-defined, feces-derived gamish injected into them. This is why “HIV” is not exogenous or an exogenous virus, and vaccinology is the greatest experiment with the greatest N-numbers to prove the validity of this assertion.

This is why “the probable cause of “HIV” is a retroid.”

Now what happens to the body over the weeks after “strain A, B, and C” are introduced. First, the longer these molecules are in the body, and away from the proximal assault during which they are first introduced (the snake bite, vaccine, etc.) the less we understand. But in clear studies such as Andrew Wakefield’s on MMR, and molecular mimicry studies done by Gary and Asa with squalene and the antibodies it generated in Gulf -War Vets WHO BECAME ILL, and in Barbara Loe Fisher’s studies of molecular mimicry regarding demylination, and in the 160,000 cats/year that develop tumors at their injection sites, and also Yarkoni and Raff’s work with mineral oil and squalene being able to “reject” tumors in 12/13 tumor-inoculated hamsters, and the ability of Coley’s toxins to cause rejection of cancer in approximately half of more than 800 patients he chronicled who were inoperable, end-stage cancer patients, we find a wealth of information that can help resolve the long-term effects of foreign molecules artificially placed in the human body.

In all of these cases, be it demyelination, tumor formation, tumor rejection, and auto-immune disease induction, ischemia plays a decidedly important role, either in combination with extracellular matrix formation or dissolution, which is a process that occurs over weeks. In other words, the long-term effects of all of these irritants have an important association in the way they either stimulate the long-term “seroconversion”-associated mechanisms to resist matrix or promote an imbalance of matrix production, away from that which is normally present during the hours and days following the initial assault by FOREIGN molecules. All of these processes probably involve ischemia.

With vascuogenic mimicry as a case in point, and as we discovered that malignant tumors erect their own perfusion channels our team called vasculogenic mimicry channels, the rules of normal tissue homeostasis are obviated from those principles of homeostasis seen in normal wound and tissue repair contexts, but, the matrix or biofilm-encased cell clusters of malignant tumor cells still acquire “perfusion,” and clearance of their waste products, otherwise, like Viagra-treated penises, the tissue would become necrotic, and the cancer in this case would be cured. We rarely see necrosis in melanomas containing vasculogenic mimicry channels, and when we do (in about 8% of them), there typically are huge immune responses occurring (presence of macrophages in the channels-again consistent with Moulden’s idea). We know that these tumor cells can grow without significant or at times, any measureable levels of O2, and all that they appear to need is oxygen poor blood plasma to carry in nutrients and carry out waste products, but that is because these channels are tiny (less than the diameter of red blood cells-most of them are a micron or two in diameter) and the malignant cells acquire the ability like anaerobic bacteria, to switch to glycolytic metabolism so they still acquire their electron transport chain-dependent ATP and GTP molecules in order to grow and function as living cells.

In the 160,000 vaccinated cats/year that will develop tumors at their injection sites, the long-term “seroconversion” process is perhaps revealed most clearly. The foreign substances injected (the irritants) become walled off at the injection site and interfere with fibronectin and laminin production, disrupting the balance of these “gas” and “break” molecules of all tissue growth, and they become walled off, and begin a poorly understood process of characteristic ischemic responses amidst or surrounded by the body’s successful attempts at normal tissue repair, which includes angiogenesis. This is why you can inject the tumor implanted in a mouse with a drug or dye, and that dye will “flush” through the entire mouse within a second. At the same time the tumor tissue is ischemic and walled off, the channels provide a direct hook-up to the organism’s normal perfusion system, and the injected substance rapidly is disseminated throughout the circulation. But there is ischemia in place despite the readily measured perfusion-a kind of microischemia due to the matrix, that functions to derail the normal healing process, indefinitely.

Similarly in the dogs that develop tumors at their injection sites, or arthritis or demyelination syndromes, or other autoimmune diseases after vaccination (as recently reported by the Italians), each of these processes involves what probably will eventually be understood and referred to now as molecular mimicry-but this molecular mimicry, instead of simply tricking the immune system to attack foreign molecules and one’s own foreign-molecule-similar tissues (myelin) alike, one needs to incorporate how long-term mechanisms such as matrix dynamics serves to impede or accelerate the normal process of tissue repair. In many of these syndromes, however, ischemia will be detected-in arthritic joints, in myelin sheaths that are normally highly vascularized, in Chrone’s disease where the normal diverticula are no longer perfused normally, in MS, in autistic children, whose unifying characteristic is the gut/brain axis, due perhaps to the body being tricked into attacking foreign food molecules or anything consumed by the infant following or immediately before vaccination, when their intestines are highly permeable due to their age and the food they eat isn’t prohibited from directly entering the blood, and sometimes the brain directly, as shown by Wakefield.

THE HEALTHY SICK PEOPLE: WHAT ABOUT AAIDS MR. JENNER? BEHOLD, A PALE VACCINE!

In 1898, The Royal Commission of England was appointed to inquire into certain aspects of the vaccination question. The committee would be in session for 7 years and would issue 6 reports, with the final report in 1896. The result of the final report was The Vaccination Act of 1898, and the 1898 Vaccination Act removed penalties from vaccination law, and they recommended that mandatory vaccination should be stopped.
.
In 1900, The Rockefeller and J. P. Morgan syndicate bought Encyclopedia Britannica, and all derogatory references to vaccination were removed.

In 1905, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld state laws mandating smallpox vaccinations and in 1906 to 1928 the vaccines against pertussis. Records show that in 1907, the neurotoxin calcium arsenate came into use primarily on cotton crops, and in 1908 in a Massachusetts town with three cotton mills and apple orchards, 69 children suddenly fell ill with infantile paralysis. And in 1909, the UK banned apple imports from the States because of the heavy lead arsenateresidues.

Finally, in 1909, Landsteiner and Popper ground up the spinal cord of a 9-year-old paralysis victim, and injected a cup of the suspension directly into the brains of two monkeys. One died immediately, and the other slowly became paralyzed. In 1910, Flexer and Lewis again ground up human spinal cord of a paralysis victim and injected the suspension directly into a monkey’s brain, the monkey became paralyzed, then they extracted some fluid from its brain, and injected it into another monkey’s brain, and so on, through a series of monkeys paralyzing all of them in the process. But making the monkeys drink the liquid or injecting it into their arms, the suspension did not paralyze them.

The first American public health intervention and control programs occurred during and following the Great 1916 epidemic of paralysis that is now attributed to poliovirus. During the “epidemic” in New York, fear of contagion and a healthy carrier state were being asserted as fact for the first time in its recognizable modern form.
The epidemic began 4 years after the implementation of mandatory small pox vaccination in 1911 of military recruits. Both before and during this 1916 New York acute paralysis epidemic, and still today, nobody could figure out why both rich and poor became paralyzed, and every person and every thing became a suspected source or carrier of the paralytic syndrome. Despite the fact that nobody could explain why individuals that were well fed or hungry became paralyzed, or why paralysis prevalence was also occurring among gentiles and, at a seemingly less rate among the “unwashed immigrants” living in New York’s burrows, swimming in public pools, and admission of children in movie theatres was banned or regulated. Small towns in New York State wouldn’t allow trains from Vermont to stop, and they did not allow persons from these trains into their shops. Residents in New York were fined if they failed to maintain their living quarter environs as clean as possible. Travelers leaving New York were shunned and children were prohibited from entering restaurants in places like Vermont.

Dirt was the primary suspect. Fear turned into public health campaigns to police the residents and enforce quarantines and levy fines at those who didn’t keep their windows tightly closed during the hot summer and early fall to ward off an imagined house fly vector that might carry the “illness” from the poorer districts of New York to where the middle class or upper classes lived. Despite their experiments, public health officials, and medical doctors such as Flexner (who believed polio to be spread through the air and sputum) couldn’t explain why rich Philadelphia playboys and orphans of the state would both contract paralysis, or how only one individual out of a family of many children acquired symptomatic paralysis, while others in the same family may present with only a runny nose, or no symptoms at all.

An excellent account of this era leading up to the Great 1916 “polio epidemic” can be found in “Infantile Paralysis in Vermont,” published in 1924 by The Burlington Vermont State Department of Public Health. This “record” is a collection of yearly maps of Vermont, compiled by Dr. Charles Solomon Caverly. The book begins with a description of a paralytic outbreak that took place in the summer of 1894, and a series of maps of Vermont then is provided where each recorded case was marked on the map with a red dot to note the location of the victim. Not only did each year’s map record every reported case of paralysis that occurred, and where in the state each case occurred (by county), detailed information about each case was also provided by Dr. Caverly-the ethnic background of the family, the employment status and line of work of the head of the household, the time of year it was reported, the temperature and weather at the time of diagnosis, the amount of rainfall measured, how the paralysis became manifested (and in which limb(s), how many days the incubation period likely lasted before paralysis was first observed (typically no longer than several days), and dozens of other interesting facts that Caverly recorded about each case. At the end of each chapter in The Record, Caverly speculated about each year’s case clusters, as to how paralysis and reported cases could possibly “travel” infectiously from county to county from the previous year, in an attempt to discover how “paralysis” cases spread (along train routes, roadway routes, water routes, etc). But there appeared to be no railroad lines, or roads, rivers, natural barriers such as mountains, or any other reason to account for how one year, 1910 for instance, higher clusters of paralysis occurred on one side of a mountain valley while the next year, the other side of the mountain and across the state was where the new cases occurred, while no new cases occurred again in the first place, and even though the mountains would have restricted spread, by limiting travel of “infected” people.

Despite not knowing the cause of paralysis, it has been noted by medical historians, that to “reduce” the symptoms of paralysis, certain doctors performed more spinal taps than could be counted. Records of “exsanguinations” of cerebral spinal fluid, and/or the practice of injecting highly neurotoxic mercury into the spinal cord were also kept by some State Health Departments.

During the 1940’s, advertisements appeared in American magazines showing cartoons of huge house-flies attacking babies as they slept in their cribs, as it was still thought in the 1940’s that flies were still perhaps the most likely source of paralysis. DDT was then developed to spray everything, including the household kitchen and the food supply, when it wasn’t yet appreciated that DDT and other pesticides such as arsenic used at the turn of the century in the orchards scattered about New England induced the same pathological damage to the same areas of nerve tissue that was and is characteristic of that now assumed to be infection-acquired paralysis from a virus.

Similar to the increase in seroconversion rate observed in the “HIV”-vaccine recipients in the STEP trail versus placebos, during the first wave of the Salk polio vaccine crusade in 1954-1955, it was reported that the occurrence of paralysis increased in those vaccinated with Dr. Salk’s vaccine. Most physicians, but not all, were eventually alerted by the Public Health Service about the fact that various lots of the first wave of “polio” vaccines were being recalled due to the fact they were increasing rather than decreasing rates of paralysis in the vaccinated (From Debbie Bookchin, Jim Schumacher-The Virus and The Vaccine-The True Story Of A Cancer-Causing Monkey Virus-Contaminated Polio Vaccine, And the Millions Of Americans Exposed. St. Martin’s Press, 2004):

In California, acute flaccid paralysis due to the vaccine increased three-fold above background incidence, in Idaho, some fifteen-fold, and in The South, Chicago, and elsewhere, many times above the normal background incidence of paralysis was recorded. Massachusetts reported a 642% increase in polio since vaccinations with vaccination of 130,000 children. In 1956, Idaho health director Peterson stated that polio only struck vaccinated children in areas where there had been no cases of polio since the preceding autumn. In 90% of the cases, the paralysis occurred in the arm in which the vaccine had been injected. Many of these physicians who had been notified that the polio vaccine was causing polio voluntarily stopped delivering the vaccine. The first report about polio being caused by the vaccine came from Michael Reese hospital in Chicago.”

May,1955. “With the announcement that Cutter was withdrawing its vaccine, there ensued a nationwide panic. The AMA put out the warning to all its members to stop using Cutter vaccine, although regrettably some doctors never received word. Many states and cities announced immediate cessation of mass immunizations, even though their vaccine had come from manufacturers other than Cutter. Local health departments began to track down every single dose of Cutter vaccine, which, it was soon discovered, had traversed the entire country. Throughout May and June, cases of polio caused by Cutter’s vaccine spread beyond the Far West and began to appear in every region of the country. The epicenter of the devastation was in California and the rural state of Idaho. Ninety-nine cases of polio would eventually be attributed to Cutter vaccine in California, with the incidence of polio among Cutter vaccinees exceeding the textbook definition of a wild polio epidemic by nearly threefold. In Idaho, with eighty-eight polio cases attributed to Cutter vaccine, the rate was fifteen times greater. Before it was over, the ‘Cutter incident,’ as it was euphemistically called in scientific circles, resulted in 260 people contracting polio and almost 200 cases of paralysis. Eleven people died. A devastating epidemic had been caused by two particularly bad batches of vaccine.”

In 1972, Jonas Salk, inventor of the killed polio vaccine, testified before a Senate subcommittee that nearly all polio outbreaks since 1961 were caused by the oral polio vaccine (Dr. Salk didn’t like Dr. Sabin very much, or so it is claimed, and the hatred flowed in both directions). Similarly, and despite the 2004-5 West African polio eradication campaign by the CDC and the WHO, intended as part of the World Health Organization’s 15 year drive to halt transmission of the poliomyelitis across the world by 2005 and to stamp out the polio in those regions, it turned out that the most heavily vaccinated countries like Nigeria now lead the world in new polio cases with 4,937 cases http://www.who.int/vaccines/immunization_monitoring/en/diseases/poliomyelitis/afpextract.cfm.

In 1992, America’s Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta admitted that the polio live-virus vaccine had become the main cause of polio in the United States. Specifically, the CDC asserted that, from 1973 to 1983, 87% of all (non-imported) cases of polio resulted directly from vaccine administration. Even more amazingly, it was asserted that every non-imported case of polio in the United States from 1980 to 1989 was vaccine-induced [1].

Vaccination does not induce an immunological state equivalent to natural immunity. Many investigators have suspected and written volumes about the possibility that in many communicable illnesses in which antibodies that are considered protective and are generated as a response to a microbe, that in most cases, naturally acquired infections are not accompanied by significant morbidity, or indeed, any clinical symptoms at all, in the vast majority of those who will test positive as evidence of exposure.

Similarly, the molecular signatures or markers of “HTLV-1” “HTLV-II,” “HIV,” hepatitis B and C, Epstein-Barr, Human Papilloma (HPV), herpes, SV-40, SV-40, and prion molecular “signatures” or markers are exhibited by those who “test positive,” and yet most live in a healthy “carrier” state all their lives. Clearly, in so many different contexts, molecular signatures (antibodies as evidence of disease exposure or vaccination) do not equal protection afforded by natural infections, nor do they predict the future occurrence of actual disease.

Carefully controlled studies conducted for 35 or more years that followed SV-40-contaminated polio-vaccine recipients have been reported, that despite the fact that SV-40 was injected directly into the arms or buttocks of millions of infants and children, an increase in cancer has not resulted. In their 2001 publication, Pankhurst et al. warned that their 35 year post-polio vaccine mortality study of infants injected with the vaccines contaminated with SV-40 has not been long enough to unequivocally determine if SV-40 is contributing to escalating cancer rates (unlike Merck, which now aggressively advertises that after only about 5 years, their HPV vaccine Gardasil is 100% effective). As a scientist, one couldn’t ask for a more convincing experiment relevant to human beings, that to date, a virus or agent that can be shown to cause cancer in inbred lab animals such as hamsters, or which is peacefully situated in monkey kidney cells without causing cancer, may not be able to cause cancer in Humans either, even as potentially devastating as this mass human experiment could have turned out if it did. In this context, as evidence that these vaccines were contaminated with SV-40, it also should be mentioned that during this period, studies were done during the early 1960’s that documented the molecular signature of SV-40 in the Soviets and other victims of the first polio crusades, in which SV-40 was detected in nasal swabs after vaccination, but again, no increased cancer rates were reported among these groups.

The thirty-five year mortality study on people now in middle age following receipt of SV40-simian-(cancer) virus-contaminated and feces-derived polio vaccine show that out of 1073 newborns that were vaccinated and carefully followed for 35 years, (which the authors cautiously claim is not really long enough to determine if the agent causes cancer in humans), of the millions of individuals who were given this “cancer virus-contaminated vaccine ” between 1959 and 1963, there has been no apparent increase in cancer above the expected background incidences in this carefully followed subgroup according to Carroll-Pankhurst et al., in her 2001 study published in the British Journal of Cancer. There are some scientists, however, such as Michele Carbone, and a group in Australia, that believe SV-40 has caused increases in mesothelioma, brain cancers, leukemias, and other cancers in Humans, but their cohorts have not been studied as long as Pankurst’s.

SV-40, the contaminant of the polio vaccine that was feared might cause epidemic cancers was placed into the family of viruses known as polyoma viruses because, as stated in dictionary definitions:

[Polyoma viruses] are DNA-based (double-stranded DNA,~5000 base pairs, circular genome), small (40-50 nanometers in diameter), and icosahedral in shape, and do not have a lipoprotein envelope. They are potentially oncogenic (tumor-causing); they often persist as latent infections in a host without causing disease, but may produce tumors in a host of a different species, or a host with an ineffective immune system. The name polyoma refers to the viruses’ ability to produce multiple (poly-) tumors (-oma).

But most important to this discussion regarding the imagined effect of this “cancer causing agent” in humans, it is now thought that there are at least several polyomaviruses found in humans. In addition to SV-40:

it is now believed that:

JC virus, can infect the respiratory system, kidneys, or brain (sometimes causing the fatal progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in the latter case), and BK virus, which produces a mild respiratory infection and can affect the kidneys of immunosuppressed transplant patients. Both viruses are very widespread: approximately 80 percent of the adult population in the United States have antibodies to BK and JC…

but yet 80% of us do not have cancer.

The polio vaccine era taught two lessons. That polio vaccines increased the rates of polio, and a potential cancer-causing contaminant, SV-40, has probably not increased cancer rates among human polio vaccine recipients, although 80% of adults are said to “test positive” for at least one type of cancer-causing polyoma “virus” or another.

The postulation of a “healthy carrier state” also is why hepatitis B “experts” have hypothesized there may be more than 350 million healthy sick folks carrying around hepatitis B antibodies, and why AIDS “experts” now advocate testing every man, woman, and child for “HIV” at least once in their lifetime so that we can all know “our status.”

However, according to the promoters of AIDS, unlike the molecular signature associated with “polio” and paralysis in rare cases, the molecular signatures of “HIV” will ultimately predict and “cause” AIDS in almost everyone it “infects” (Robert Gallo, personal communication), except of course “paradoxically,” in so-called “Long-Term Non-Progressors,” “elite controllers,” prostitutes, and most Africans, who test positive for surrogate markers of “HIV,” but never become clinically ill. One caveat is that we don’t know the frequency of the progression to AIDS in “HIV positives” who have avoided testing, or refused medication, and who have hidden below The State’s radar screen for one reason or another. The government and the promoters of AIDS like Marc Wainberg say these irresponsible (most of whom are African, African American, or some other non-white populations, or scientists like myself or Peter Duesberg) are “test dodgers” who need to be identified, rounded up, subjected to “HIV” testing, sequestered, vaccinated, drugged, or incarcerated in prisons for criminal attempted murder!

This certainty amongst the AIDS Establishment and the Public Health Service that “HIV” causes “AIDS” in nearly 100% of those who test positive yet show no clinical symptoms, while identifying potentially “diseased individuals,” generates harm to many innocents, and has undermined a scientific generation’s ability to do or discuss science or public health issues rationally. The public policies fueled by this belief regarding the healthy carrier state in the “hepatitis B” and “hepatitis C,” “HPV,” and “HIV/AIDS” arenas have in turn developed their own inertias, much as did the fear of paralysis during the “polio” eras.

In the context of a culture that fosters prudishness regarding sexual freedom and xenophobia regarding various groups, or flat-out racism, and, ultimately because of a deep-seated fear of contagion, it now can be convincingly argued that the AIDS era fundamentally changed the way biological and biomedical science as well as scientific method itself is conducted. Regarded as a sexually-transmitted, drug-addict associated,  homosexual and especially black-person-associated affliction, the AIDS era has profoundly altered our geopolitical awareness of human population dynamics and travel into the U.S, or other countries. The AIDS era has changed the way we regard people in poverty, diagnose disease, define health, ignore the long-term consequences of addiction, regard foreigners as potential carriers, and regard human sexuality as “risky business.” At least three quarters of a trillion dollars, according to FAIR (Fair Allocations In Research-a group of transplant physicians and dentists who want to stop all AIDS funding-see Sacrifice of The Virgins on this Website for their URL) have been spent during the “War on AIDS” to force our cultural values and toxic drugs on others, without any biological basis or medical insight(s) as to the real causes of AIDS or to support any of the many approaches that have reversed it non-toxically. Instead, during this expensive, homophobic, racist, and arguably sexist horror show, new largely politically and economically-shaped concepts of contagion, disease, genetic mutation, and perverse ideas about what constitutes experimental groups and control groups have gained ground, and which have been put into place under the banner of “compassionate concerns” for the placebo group(s) in ways that are all inconsistent with the scientific method.

An “AIDS expert,” might argue that to trivialize, or ignore the healthy carrier state, in which a vast majority of positives never show disease symptoms, is not only wrong, but it is dangerous to public health, and that dissent or “Holocaust denialism” as it is called when “HIV/AIDS” catechisms are questioned, threaten to spread disease. This behavior may derive from very early learned behavior among mammals generally, judging from the xenophobic and avoidance tendencies exhibited by certain higher groups of mammals when they are confronted with other diseased animals in certain situations-a phenomenon that causes highly social primates such as humans, and perhaps other mammals, to act “instinctually” at times, instead of behaving according to evidence and reason. Similarly, the impulse in us that fears contagion or that shuns the sick or infirm, may derive from misplaced yet pervasive instinctual and religious viewpoints of health, disease, and mysticism. Perhaps we acquired this impulse from a common ancestor that preceded both Proboscidea (elephants) and primates (us), since both of our groups tend to bury the dead, or perhaps we acquired it during our own primate divergence? All that is really certain, is that some members of our species who inhabit health departments or government agencies like the CDC, and perhaps certain religious orders like The NIH, have acquired and exhibit more of this fear or shunning “gene” than do others amongst us.

In my view, however, it is more likely we have acquired these issues not because of Nature, but because of “nuture,” in that eugenics, rascism, both illicit and legal drug pushing are learned behaviors based upon distorted thinking and highly flawed and uninformed reasoning. For instance, in the context of pure racism, and clothed with the legitimacy and highly technical language or nomenclature and techniques of molecular genetics, although nobody has ever seen an AIDS virus jumping from a non-human primate to an African, or even shown that “HIV” is transmitted among humans as shown by the 10-year Padian Study and many others that all showed NO transmission among serodiscordant couples, and to make the point as disgusting and racist as it gets, as recently as 2008, and according to their new genome analyses, and their comparisons between what they think are “HIV” and “SIV” “genome” sequences, we even still find that the high priced magazine Nature publishing a claim that “HIV” and AIDS was the fault of dark skinned African peoples and their “associations” with non-human primates. These imagined zoonotic exchanges, according to Nature, Science, The Lancet, and other high priced glossy-covered magazines, first took place in Cameroon, when the Africans built cities near chimps, and had “high risk” behaviors near them, or with them, 125 years ago.

And although these now institutionalized racist theories of the origin of “HIV” via sequence analyses still may not demonstrate beyond all doubt that “HIV” “jumped” from monkeys or apes to blacks, and then somehow of course to gays in California and New York, and then to many white American victims like the AZT-killed Kimberly Bergalis, Ryan White who wasn’t permitted entry into his school because of his diagnosis and then killed with AZT, or Tommy Morrison, the two-time heavyweight prize fighter whose career was ruined after an “HIV” diagnosis, the Glaser family, as well as atheletes such as tennis star Arthur Ashe, the ballet master, or Rudolf Nuryev, or basketball great, Magic Johnson, or indeed approximately 33 million others, these ideas of initial species jumping, rather than phylogenetic conservativism or non-conservatism of genetic sequence homology form one of the foundations of “AIDS science.” But when the Promoters of AIDS continue to ignore phylogenetic conservativism among molecules evolved among primates and in the name of protecting the public health continue to claim that “HIV” undoubtedly emerged from Black African’s“close associations” with chimps and gorillas, perhaps when they built cities with them 125 years ago as described in prestigious peer-reviewed journals such as Nature, Nature Medicine, The Lancet, or the New England Journal of Medicine, or claim these Africans ate primates as “bushmeat” when they caught the virus, or that AIDS is a problem of too many smallpox vaccines or not enough of them, or due to limited “social mobility,” then one might out of common sense ask if there is good cause to perhaps consider other hypotheses regarding the emergence and phenomenon of AIDS.

But the consideration of other hypotheses isn’t allowed: “HIV” is a National security issue, and, even as recently as 2008, it was claimed in the journal Nature Medicine by the white biomedical establishment that an African woman who tested “HIV” positive was said to have had a high probably of “exposure(s)” with a gorilla or a chimp. And in doing so, the virus rapidly mutated in her body (although she didn’t have any symptoms-as she now is “a healthy carrier” of a New AIDS virus). Now, because she herself is probably lying by the authors’ implications because she claimed she had no such association with a gorilla and is not ill, she is creating the threat of yet a new global pandemic AIDS virus, and a new virus that causes AIDS. Why would any scientific journal publish any such claim that, although she is not sick, this woman from Camaroon no living in Paris definitely caught “HIV” from a gorilla or from a gorilla through chimp exposure, and, of course like the Andromeda strain, it has mutated immediately in her body to form a new, rapidly growing, probably widespread, deadly pandemic virus, as reported in Nature Medicine and news-flashed throughout the world on government-controlled media like ABC news?  Because “AIDS-speak,” “AIDS-science,” and cancer biology and treatment involving numerous drugs or treatments can be complex and highly coded in the language with which it is often presented, and much of this language and thinking is based on wrong assumptions about molecular phylogeny, outright racism, or homophobia.

“NEW HIV STRAIN DISCOVERED IN WOMAN FROM CAMEROON, Randolph Schmidt, AP Science Writer (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory?id=8233721 ):

A new strain of the virus that causes AIDS has been discovered in a [black] woman from the African nation of Cameroon. It differs from the three known strains of human immunodeficiency virus and appears to be closely related to a form of simian virus recently discovered in wild gorillas, researchers report in Monday’s edition of the journal Nature Medicine. The finding highlights the continuing need to watch closely for the emergence for new HIV variants”, said the researchers, led by Jean-Christophe Plantier of the University of Rouen, France. The three previously known HIV strains are related to the simian virus that occurs in chimpanzees. The most likely explanation for the new find is gorilla-to-human transmission, Plantier’s team said. But they added they cannot rule out the possibility that the new strain started in chimpanzees and moved into gorillas and then humans, or moved directly from chimpanzees to both gorillas and humans. The 62-year-old patient tested positive for HIV in 2004, shortly after moving to Paris from Cameroon, according to the researchers. She had lived near Yaounde, the capital of Cameroon, but said she had no contact with apes or bush meat, a name often given to meat from wild animals in tropical countries. The woman currently shows no signs of AIDS and remains untreated, though she still carries the virus, the researchers said. How widespread this strain is remains to be determined. Researchers said it could be circulating unnoticed in Cameroon or elsewhere. The virus’ rapid replication indicates that it is adapted to human cells, the researchers reported. Their research was supported by the French Health Watch Institute, the French National Agency for Research on AIDS and Viral Hepatitis and Rouen University Hospital.”

But when will the scientists, doctors, and public health officials who inhabit these steel and glass environments, who continue to promote the “HIV=AIDS=death” hypothesis, and who malign or try to destroy those who ask questions, begin to someday ask themselves why “HIV’s” components aren’t immunogenic after the 60th or perhaps 172nd failed “HIV” vaccine trial, and then begin to look at other hypotheses to explain severe immune suppressive illnesses, or begin to ask themselves why a positive “HIV” test result is something to fear, since that is what they are trying to evoke with an “HIV” vaccine but can’t because nobody has isolated an exogenous virus that is foreign to “self” in the case of “HIV?”

At least certain questions should be answered, however, before draconian measures such as universal testing or imprisonment because of “HIV” criminalization are implemented to stifle hypotheses that do not conform to the “HIV=AIDS=Death” paradigm. For example, if “HIV” is isolatable as an exogenous unique retrovirus, and its supposedly isolated and unique components have been separated and purified, then how could a flu vaccine cause “HIV-negative” persons to test positive for “HIV” (2) (about 2% of us according to Jeffrey Klausner who is an AIDS research head in San Francisco)? Klausner, as well as many other “HIV experts” are aware of this sad situation because as recently as March 2006, an article was published in the New England Journal of Medicine pointing out an earlier finding and warning that:

” A case-control study 2 of 101 blood donors (Simonson et al., 1995) who had been vaccinated against influenza and 191 matched controls showed that recent inoculation with any brand of influenza vaccine was significantly associated with a false positive screening assay for HIV antibodies. Guidelines of both Johns Hopkins and the New York State Department of Health list influenza vaccination as a known cause of indeterminate results on Western blotting for HIV antibodies (Reasons for false-positive, false-negative, and indeterminate results in assays for the detection of antibodies against HIV)” (3).

The “HIV=AIDS=Death” faithful attribute these non-specific test results to false positive testing, and at the same time tell us that the test kits are nearly 100% accurate. However, the reason for testing positive after a flu vaccine is due to testing artifacts such as non-specificity or antibody promiscuity, molecular mimicry, and a dozen other chemical reasons that have nothing to do with any virus, pathogen, and in many cases, any disease.  So when these vaccines (hepatitis B, influenza, and tetanus) actually generate “HIV positives” because of non-specific cross-reactivity and for other reasons such as the fact that it is known that “HIV” ELISA’s detect more than 70 previously known syndromes that have nothing to do with viruses, then what should we do when these entirely vaccinated populations are generated, that will need to be stigmatized, quarantined, and “treated” with those block box label “life-saving” anti-retrovirals, merely because they received a flu or hep B shot (with the flu vaccine alone, if a false-positive rate of 2% occurs in a trial of 10 million vaccines, 200,000 cases of “HIV’s” molecular signature would result, according to Klausner’s statistics)?

If “HIV” were really a unique exogenous retrovirus, and if its components had been purified (or even if they haven’t been purified to homogeneity), then under no circumstances would the antibodies from pregnant or multiparous women be generated against “HIV’s” molecular signature, yet pregnant women (especially multiparous ones who have had more than one child) tend to test positive at a low rate, even if they have not been vaccinated with flu vaccines, hepatitis B vaccines, or tetanus vaccines, according to the CDC’s information. Others tend to test positive for other reasons as well. For example, persons who suffer from chronic infections also express “HIV’s” molecular signature at a low rate (4-9).

If “HIV” was isolatable as an exogenous unique retrovirus and its supposedly non-cell derived components had been purified and properly separated from normal cellular nucleic acid sequences and proteins, and its products were then shown to be produced by a unique exogenous virus’s nucleic acid template sequence encoding unique “HIV” virus particles, then how could antigens introduced by a hepatitis B vaccination cause a percentage of persons to test positive for “HIV” (10)? Hepatitis B antigens are supposedly different than “HIV” antigens because supposedly it is a different and unrelated “virus,” so how could hepatitis B antigens evoke “HIV” “specific” markers in hepatitis B vaccinated individuals? This violates what we understand about immunology, vaccinology, the molecular identity of “hepatitis B,” and “HIV,” doesn’t it?

To put things into perspective, the results of the recently aborted STEP trail should be compared to seroconversion rates of other vaccines, which are always confounded by natural rates of immunization acquired through natural exposure to a foreign molecule or foreign germ.

THE ABORTED STEP “HIV-VACCINE” TRIAL:

According to what was understood two decades ago about Man’s immune system, it was assumed that a vaccinated individual would develop antibodies against those molecules that are foreign to the human body. This would mean, in the case of an “HIV/AIDS” vaccine, and whether “HIV” was isolated and purified to homogeneity or not, the vaccinated would need to carry around a letter to prove their “HIV-positive status” was caused by a vaccine, rather than from “risky” behaviors, or from being in an “at risk” group (from sex, dirty needles, exposure at the time of birth, breast-feeding, transfusions, being of African decent, being gay, being a drug addict, being pregnant, from having an autoimmune disease, or for dozens of other reasons).

But after more than 64 “HIV” vaccine trials, letters as proof of “HIV” vaccination have not been needed. The few who have exhibited an “HIV-positive” test result (the expected outcome after vaccination) have been told their “HIV-positive” status was due to their own “risky” activities (sex), and not due to the vaccine. These individuals are now regarded and treated as AIDS patients, regardless of their health status, and despite the fact they received an “HIV” vaccine.

The repeated failure of “HIV” vaccines to produce an appropriate immune response (conversion from a negative to a positive “HIV” test result) or to confer protection from “HIV” or AIDS in those vaccinated after so many “HIV” vaccine trials strongly suggests some measure of urgency or alarm is in order.

Failure to seroconvert to a positive “HIV” test result after vaccination can mean one of two things: either the principles underlying immunology, biochemistry, genetics, epidemiology, virology, cell biology, pharmacology, neonatology, and cancer biology simply do not apply to “HIV/AIDS,” or it means that the hypothesized “HIV” causation of “AIDS,” and the imagined molecular biological causal basis of AIDS AND several other “molecular diseases” have generated catastrophic disasters that require our immediate attention. The molecular diseases in question are those syndromes and their associated molecular signatures that have historically had some connection with cancer. These include hepatitis B, hepatitis C, HPV, and, SV-40. The urgency to critically reexamine our understanding of “HIV/AIDS” was nowhere driven home more powerfully than the recently announced failure of the STEP “HIV” vaccine trial (Aidsmap news, Keith Alcorn, Saturday, September 22, 2007): “Merck HIV vaccine fails, trials halted.”

These fractions are important to remember:
24/741 Proportion of recipients that seroconverted and who were given at least one vaccine dose- the experimentally vaccinated group.

21/762 Proportion of recipients that seroconverted and who were given at least one placebo vaccine dose-a placebo group.

19/672 Proportion of recipients that seroconverted and who were given two vaccine doses-the experimentally vaccinated group.

11/691 Proportion of recipients that seroconverted and who were given two placebo vaccine doses, another placebo group

The failure of this trial is being grieved as a huge disappointment to virtually everyone working in the field of “HIV=AIDS=Death.”

The Challenger disaster, more and fatter cellular targets for HIV, and monkeys are too expensive.

As mentioned, the AIDS industry blamed the few “who became infected” on the behavior of the volunteers after they had been given the vaccine, with no mention of possible false positives, or the possibility that they somehow acquired the positive result from the recombinant “HIV-component-containing” vaccine. They blamed it instead on prior exposure to the adnenovirus vector. Some experts, however, have expressed concern that somehow the vaccine itself might have caused “HIV-infection” in the 24/741 volunteers given one dose of the experimental vaccine, and in the 19/672 volunteers given two doses, which is why the trials were halted. In both studies, people who got vaccine were more likely — not less — to become “infected” with “HIV” with trends suggesting roughly a twofold risk after “HIV” vaccination.

Therefore, it can be safely concluded that the AIDS industry and U.S. government have spent billions to provide us with a vaccine that will slightly increase, rather than decrease “HIV” seroprevalence.

Robert Gallo, co-discoverer of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and head of the Institute for Human Virology in Baltimore, said of the trials (see Figure 1)“This is on the same level of catastrophe as the Challenger disaster that destroyed a NASA space shuttle.”

The leading hypothesis offered by the AIDS industry for the vaccine’s failure and the increase in acquiring “HIV infection” among the “HIV” vaccine recipients is that:

” People who received the vaccine had greater-than-normal activation and consequently produced more and fatter cellular targets for HIV. That then increased their chances of becoming infected should they encounter the virus in unprotected intercourse.”

Yet two facts make this claim unlikely:

“People have been suffering immune-activating infections and getting vaccines for years, and there has never been evidence that those events increased a person’s risk of acquiring HIV. These vaccine trials would be odd places to first notice such a thing. Furthermore, people in the STEP study who got the vaccine did not have more activated CD4 cells than people who got placebo — something that Merck vaccine executive Mark B. Feinberg called “kind of an interesting and unexplained observation.” (http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/03/aids-vaccines-a-catastrophe-like-the-challenger/):

Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which sponsored the trials said:

“There is something very, very peculiar going on in the vaccine trials.”

In an interview with these and other top AIDS researchers of this “Challenger disaster-sized” vaccine failure, Ed Silverman suggested that this failure and insurmountable problems included such possibilities as (http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/03/aids-vaccines-a-catastrophe-like-the-challenger/):

“The multiple surprises have reminded researchers how much they still do not know about HIV’s biology. It has also focused attention on questions they never asked.”

“For example, none of the monkey experiments with the Merck vaccine subjected animals to the kind of sexual exposure that people in the trial had — namely, repeated encounters with low doses of HIV, with no single exposure being especially high-risk.”

“Why not?”

“The researchers did not have any reason to believe the vaccine might be harmful (although they acknowledged it might not be effective), and in any case such a study would have required quite a large number of monkeys, which are expensive to acquire and maintain for research.”

“Instead, researchers vaccinated a relatively small number of monkeys with the Merck vaccine and then injected them with the monkey equivalent of HIV in a manner that guaranteed they would become infected. Those animals did much better over the long run than infected but unvaccinated ones.”

The vaccine’s failure to protect recipients from acquiring “HIV” was also a big disappointment to the recipients of the anti-“HIV” vaccine. The “HIV” vaccine recipients tested positive for “HIV” slightly more frequently than the non-“HIV”-vaccinated, but the differences between the groups were not significant in any arms of the STEP trial, or in any other “HIV” vaccine trial. All of these men who now test “HIV-positive” will be regarded and treated now as AIDS patients.

However, the multiple failures of this huge, expensive, and potentially dangerous STEP trial (whose scientists and doctors couldn’t afford enough monkeys to test their vaccine before trying it in humans) were predictable and not due to the reasons offered. The STEP trail did not fail because “HIV” vaccinated or placebo vaccinated individuals became “infected” after they were vaccinated; and not because the 24/741 or the 19/672 experimental groups acquired an “HIV- positive” signal from the components in the vaccine; and not because somehow the experimental vaccine made volunteers more “susceptible” to acquiring “HIV infections” because they had “more and fatter cellular targets.” A more likely explanation for the outcome of the STEP trail is that, in all groups, whether they received the experimental vaccine or whether they were placebo recipients, these low numbers represent false positives or cross reactions (cross reactions occur when the non-specific reactivity of one molecule interacts with another molecule that it isn’t structurally similar to or related to in any way), or are the result of simple testing error.

So the question becomes, how could some 33 million people in the world be said to be “infected” and walking around with specific molecules of “HIV” in their bodies, or with molecules generated by the body’s response to “HIV,” while only 24/741 or 19/672 “HIV” vaccinated individuals seroconverted to “HIV’s molecular signature, even after injecting these same molecules twice directly into their bodies by route of a vaccine?

To remain seropositive from vaccination as opposed to naturally-acquired immunity which typically is life-long, and contrary to the Jennerian paradigm, vaccines must typically be repeated? As a major part of the medical business is derived from vaccines, lots of both well and sick folks go to doctors, so doctors should be among the most miserable disease-ridden and vile creatures on earth [no comment-see Robert Mendelsohn’s Confessions of a Medical Heretic). Their increased exposure to the sick, and their daily contact with their families should make them and their families far more numerous casualties than most other people, but they aren’t. However, as it has been known for some time, the phenomenon of physician non-compliance to vaccination of themselves or their families has been the subject of concern since at least the early 1980’s. Their increased exposure to the sick, and their daily contact with their families should make them and their families far more numerous casualties than most other people, but they aren’t (From Thomas Levy, MD, FACC):

Even among the physicians who are the biggest purveyors and promoters of vaccination, it would appear that when the needle is turned around, the inoculation mania subsides. In a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, 90% of obstetricians and about 70% of pediatricians refused to take the rubella vaccine. The possibility of “unforeseen vaccine reactions” seemed to have their concern (“Rubella Vaccine and Susceptible Hospital Employees: Poor Physician Participation, Journal of the American Medical Association, February 20, 1981). Apparently, what’s good for the goose is not always what’s good for the gander. If these vaccines were truly all they were purported to be, these good doctors should have been pushing each other aside to be first in line to get stuck.”

Vaccines are the gifts that keep on giving-hundreds of billions are paid to vaccine makers to make more vaccines to protect you from the last one wearing off or to give you or your children the disease, directly into their bloodstreams, for which the vaccine was designed to prevent. This violates the Jennerian hypothesis regarding cow-pox and small pox and life-time protection he claimed, strongly suggests that many vaccines give you the disease you were vaccinated against, and it repeatedly confounds, time after time, and study after study, all claims of the Jennerian paradigm: that a one time cow pox exposure, protected the milkmaids for life against real small pox, when in fact Jenner wasn’t a doctor, and many historians now argue that the milkmaids most likely gave “the pox” to the cow utters they touched.

But, we should appreciate the nature of vaccines, which are medical procedures that place foreign antigens directly into the bloodstream, such as feces extracts in the case of the first polio vaccines, and how well the Jennerian paradigm has held up. The Jennerian paradigm stated that once an organism is inoculated with something similar to a disease-causing germ like small pox, as was the mistaken relationship between cow pox and small pox, the organism would be protected for life (even though it has been suggested that cow pox may be a human disease given to cows because it occurs on their utters if they are milked).

That the Jennerian paradigm was wrong also was demonstrated in previous centuries by the “need” for every navy to be “revaccinated.” This refutation of the Jennerian paradigm was already established in the 1800’s when the British suspended all fines and penalties (20 shillings) they had previously in place to penalize parents who failed to immunize their children. Also, for instance, when you step on a rusty nail and are forced to get a tetanus vaccine, or your yearly “flu” shot, this flies in the face of Jenner’s hypothesis. If immunity doesn’t last for life and may have nothing to do with something foreign to the immune system, or if some molecule or virus looks similar to a real pathogen, then the Jennerian paradigm is indeed wrong. Vaccines are as pale horses. Alternatively, if you want to continue believing in vaccinations or “inoculations,” then these numbers given above from different serosurveys signal that, and in order to account for the STEP trial seroconversion rates, “HIV” isn’t foreign to the human body, and isn’t even a group of molecules that can confer natural immunity.

In modern times, and despite universal vaccination of certain populations, the disease vaccinated against frequently occurs in the vaccinated (as in the STEP trail and in the polio vaccine era), and often at higher rates than background incidence before the vaccine was given (The Lancet, vol. 353, January 9, 1999, pp. 98-102):

” Subclinical measles occurred in 45 percent of vaccinated children exposed to natural measles.”

Perhaps the measles vaccine did its job here, and the 45% acquired a milder form of disease than they would have if they had not been vaccinated? How could one know? I had measles when I was a kid, wasn’t vaccinated for it, it was a mild “subclinical case” in that my mom kept me home from school, etcetera. But then, I didn’t have to report to the federal government and I couldn’t be thrown in jail, drugged for the rest of my life, and tried for murder if I had sex and didn’t tell my partner I had had the measles.

Roberts et al. provided a good excuse for non-uptake of measles, mumps, and rubella catch up immunization and side effects of the vaccine during a measles epidemic (BMJ Jun 24;310(6995):1629-32, 1995):

Many of the objections raised by parents could be overcome by emphasising that primary immunisation does not necessarily confer immunity and that diagnosis of measles is unreliable.”

Vaccines don’t work and diagnoses of diseases are “unreliable?” Interesting…thoughts to publish in the British Medical Journal. Not quite on the order of a “Challenger disaster,” but interesting never the less.

In Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop., vol. 28, no. 4, Oct-Dec pp. 339-43, 1995, we read:

“The history of previous vaccination [in very early childhood] did not diminish the number of complications of the cases studied.”

Then why vaccinate?

In Clinical Investigative Medicine, (Vol. 11, no. 4, August 1988, pp. 304-9), it says that:

“17 had been vaccinated for measles. All 17 experienced measles again, showing IgM antibodies indicating acute infection. “A history of prior vaccination is not always associated with immunity nor with the presence of specific antibodies.”

O.K. Vaccines don’t always work or follow the Jennerian paradigm, especially the one tried in the STEP trial: a multibillion dollar “Challenger-scale effort,” that increased the rate of “HIV” infection, instead of thwarting it. An extensive list of references of similar vaccine failures can be found at http://www.whale.to/vaccines/mmrjournal.html.

But, isn’t it possible that persons can possess neutralizing antibodies and still acquire a disease such as polio, hepatitis B, AIDS, cancer, or other diseases? According to NIADS, this scenario is perfectly logical (http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm):

Disease Progression Despite Antibodies

It has been argued that HIV cannot cause AIDS because the body develops HIV-specific antibodies following primary infection (Duesberg, 1992). This reasoning ignores numerous examples of viruses other than HIV that can be pathogenic after evidence of immunity appears (Oldstone, 1989). Primary poliovirus infection is a classic example of a disease in which high titers of neutralizing antibodies develop in all infected individuals, yet a small percentage of individuals develop subsequent paralysis (Kurth, 1990). Measles virus may persist for years in brain cells, eventually causing a chronic neurological disease despite the presence of antibodies (Gershon, 1990). Viruses such as cytomegalovirus, herpes simplex and varicella zoster may be activated after years of latency even in the presence of abundant antibodies (Weiss and Jaffe, 1990). Lentiviruses with long and variable latency periods, such as visna virus in sheep, cause central nervous system damage even after the specific production of neutralizing antibodies (Haase, 1990). Furthermore, it is now well-documented that HIV can mutate rapidly to circumvent immunologic control of its replication.”

What this line of AIDS-company reasoning lacks is the ending of a sentence or two:

…“high titers of neutralizing antibodies develop in all “infected” (naturally infected? vaccine infected?) individuals, yet a small percentage of individuals develop subsequent paralysis…

because that molecular marker or virus may have nothing to do with why paralysis (in this case) had occurred.

If you accept the premise that the universe is finite, or even if you don’t, it has been said that the adaptive immune system since the appearance of the most primitive chordates some 800 million years ago (animals possessing a notochord) is capable of generating some 1016 possible different kinds of lymphocyte receptors (Laird et al., PNAS Vol. 97, No. 13, June 20, 2000). At present, synthetic antigens and antibodies are frequently used to “manufacture” immune responses made to order, because it is known that the immune system can generate responses even to molecules that have never existed in this universe. Or maybe this is not the way to think about how Nature has devised an immune system against non-self? Amoebas will spit out injections of foreign amoebas because they can recognize molecules from other amoebas as non-self. Therefore, every cell might have the potential to recognize, and eliminate foreign molecules? Perhaps these other, simpler mechanisms can explain how the human immune system generates antibodies, or protection against disease. Antibody generation apparently is protective but is not protective in the case of “HIV,” and other suspected infectious molecular disease seroconversion profiles.

If we accept the mainstream view that evolution has provided us with a mechanism for recognizing, and neutralizing (with neutralizing antibodies) a daunting number of different non-self molecules (bee sting venom comes to mind), or terrorist viruses, like “HIV,” how can we reconcile the facts that “HIV” is recognized as foreign in 33 million “infected” carriers walking around at the moment, but these same molecules cannot induce the immune system to make an effective neutralizing antibody when the molecule is presented in the form of a vaccine?

Given these concerns, what then should be done regarding all the healthy carriers of a particular molecular signature when universal testing programs are set into place and begin to record the inevitable high false-positive rates that will accumulate among “low risk” groups? Perhaps those of us who have tried to figure out or predict connections between molecular signatures and diseases should ask ourselves: if 1 out of 100, or 1 out of 1,000, or 1 out of 1,000,000 develop clinical illness although all may test positive for a particular molecular signature, while 99, 999, or 999,999 don’t show clinical symptoms, should we continue to regard or attempt to explain diseases or molecular signatures tied to certain disease states, like the ones discussed here, using any of the current paradigms? All of them appear to be grievously non-predictive, and non-explanatory for any of these syndromes or their associated signatures or markers?

Until these issues are resolved, I propose that the 58 disease syndromes currently grouped collectively together called AIDS, and individuals who truly have evidence of profound immune suppression, should be dissociated from any mechanism that involves viral causality. Profound immune suppression is caused by a myriad of factors that have nothing to do with “HIV.” Immune suppression as exhibited by anergy is not found in every case of syphilis (although an identical inverted T-cell ratio seen in late-state “AIDS patients” is present among syphilitics who exhibit immune suppression). Autoimmune-disease-inducing, or other toxic mechanisms, may explain how a precipitous drop in T-cells in some individuals said to have “AIDS” occurs. Moreover, it is incorrect to group these immune suppressive syndromes under a single disease entity, “HIV/AIDS.” The consequences of this view suggest that different treatment strategies are needed for the spectrum of the 48 previously known “AIDS-indicator diseases,” rather than the toxic and dangerous pharmaceutical or vaccination approaches currently in place.

For those who harbor positive molecular signatures for “HIV” and are immunosuppressed, there is substantial evidence in the peer-reviewed scientific and medical literature to warrant changing the acronym “AIDS,” which stands for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, to “AAIDS,” which would represent Acquired Auto-Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Such a change would represent and incorporate a major paradigm shift in our thinking about autoimmunity more generally, especially with respect to the way the immune system can target various tissues of the body, including itself, through such mechanisms as molecular mimicry, oxidation, serial infections, multiple-antigen-mediated-autoimmunity (MAMA), nutritional collapse, drug toxicity, and others.

If correct, this scenario, in turn, when examined in some depth, will hopefully lead to effective ways to reverse immune suppression in certain types of “AAIDS” patients-new and innovative approaches that have never been implemented in any large clinical trial that has focused on virus suppression.

Furthermore, the suggested change in “AIDS” nomenclature is not intended to be provocative. Such a change constitutes a necessary theoretical advance that is required in order to ask better questions. The state of our knowledge regarding the cell biology of the immune system, vaccines and vaccine adjuvants, cancer biology, epidemiology, test-kit development for viral pathogenesis, and many other areas all point to huge gaps in current thinking regarding “AIDS,” “HBV,” “HCV,” “HPV,” “HTLV,” and perhaps other molecular diseases that are also infrequently associated with disease states. These gaps exist because it is not yet unknown how and under what circumstances the development of autoimmunity occurs in a wide spectrum of diseases, and how autoimmunity becomes manifested in some patients said to have “AIDS,” or other syndromes.

REFERENCES

1. Strebel, P. M., et al., Epidemiology of Poliomyelitis in the U.S. One Decade after the Last Reported Case of Indigenous Wild Virus Associated Disease, Clinical Infectious Diseases, CDC, February, pp. 568-579, 1992.

2. Simonsen L, Buffington J, Shapiro CN, et al. Multiple false reactions in viral antibody screening assays after influenza vaccination. Am J Epidemiol 141:1089-1096,1995

3. Christian, P. Erickson, Todd McNiff, Jeffrey D. Klausner. Influenza Vaccination and False Positive HIV Results New England Journal of Medicine, Number 13 , Volume 354:1422-1423, March 30, 2006.

4. http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/cjtestfp.htm.

5. Papadopulos-Eleopulos et al; Is a Positive Western Blot Proof of HIV Infection? Bio/Technology 11:696-707, 1993.

6. Papadopulos-Eleopulos et al. HIV Antibodies: Further Questions and a Plea for Clarification. Curr Med Res Opin 13:627-634, 1997.

7. Johnson C. Factors Known to Cause False-Positive HIV Antibody Test Results; Zenger’s San Diego, California, September 8-9, 1996.

8. Johnson C.JOHNSON C. Whose Antibodies Are They Anyway? Continuum (London), September/October 4(3):4-5, 1996.

9. Hodgekinson N. Science Fails the “AIDS Test”. In: AIDS: The Failure of Contemporary Science. How a Virus that Never Was Deceived the World. London: Fourth Estate. 232-262, 1996.

10. Lee, D, Eby W, Molinaro, G. HIV false positivity after Hepatitis B vaccination. Lancet 339: 1060, 1992.

RELIGIOUS TERMINOLOGY, FOOTBALL STRATEGIES, AIDS RESEARCH, AND ORIGINAL ANTIGENIC SIN.

The term, “Hail Mary,” has been used after numerous failures of the “HIV equals AIDS hypothesis” to describe the 100 billion dollar failures of AIDS research (HIV vaccine may never be found, warns leading scientist Mark Henderson, Science Editor, in Boston. From Times Online, February 14, 2008):

Professor David Baltimore, a Nobel laureate who is President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, told its annual conference in Boston that the failure of every promising approach to an HIV vaccine had led many scientists to wonder whether it would ever be possible to create one.”

While Professor Baltimore has a major grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to research a new approach to HIV therapy and treatment, he said it was a last-ditch effort with only a slim hope of success. He compared it to a “Hail Mary” play in American football – a desperate attempt at a long pass, in which the quarterback throws the ball up and prays it will be caught by a teammate.

Specialized proteins that are not found in nature that can attack “HIV?”

Hail Mary indeed!

These kinds of strategies based upon football, and faith-based science and medicine have been employed since the first decade of “HIV” vaccine research. As shown a book obtained from The Office of Technology Assessment of “HIV” vaccine development, up until 1995, the recommendations of The Office of Technology presented to the 1995 Congress by the AIDS Research Advisory Committee (ARAC) of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) were no more promising than those statements about the failed STEP trial we hear about from Dr. Baltimore and others today (1995 Congress of the United States: Office of Technology assessment. Adverse Reactions to HIV Vaccines: Medical, Ethical, and Legal Issues. Roger C. Herdman, Director).

The conclusions of this 1995 assessment recommended that Phase III clinical trials with enveloped vaccines should not proceed in the United States because of scientific, political, and ethical issues, and because of the significant level of scientific uncertainty about the wisdom of immediate trials. Not only were warnings presented about the danger of giving an “HIV” vaccine to already immunocompromised individuals (such as ARC or AIDS patients).

Such violations of biological principles and facts also may be the reason why the FDA and other agencies so frequently recall “HIV” test kit as shown even recently on the following dates (and these are only a few listed here to make the point, and only the ones that have made the Wall Street Journal: In 2001- FDA recalled 24 antigen test kit; in 2002, the FDA recalled BioRad Genetic systems HIV Types 1 &2 Synthetic Peptide containing test kits; in 2004, the FDA recalled bioMerieux NucliSens automated isolation reagent(s), DiaSoran’s HIV-1 – HIV-2 Plus O EIA Testing Software, and Roche’s Amplicor HIV Monitor test; in 2005, the FDA also recalled Globus Media Rapid HIV test kits; in 2006, the FDA recalled BioMerieux, in 2006 FDA recalled Vironostika HIV-1 test kit, and Abbott’s Home access HIVAG-1 Monoclonal EIA Test Kit. It is a shame that “HIV” test kits are being recalled a full decade after unfortunate individuals who were caught in the “AIDS trap” may have tested positive in 2006, and their lives thereafter ruined. And as I have emphasized througout this timeline, patients who were diagnosed positive with theser phony diagnostic tests are never informed, and frequently, their lives are ruined. It is as certain as these facts or occurrences represent human rights violations of the darkest kind, it is certain also that those who tested positive on such recalled or fraudulent tests, or any others, are never informed that their lives have been ruined by fraudulent tests that cannot detect any virus in the first place.

With respect to the Military-Thailand trial, some very creative “book-keeping” should be examined briefly. The vaccine track record of “HIV” vaccines, with their 64 failed trials, and the 172 duds currently in the NIH “HIV” vaccine pipeline are the best evidence we have that no such virus exists as an exogenous entity, and this most recent trial, said not to achieve statistical significance unless the data were manipulated, proves this view once more. Not only is it irrational to expect that seroconversion to gp120, which happens to about 98% of the multiple booster injections with the so-called env protein, indicates vaccine-acquired immunity, as it does with hepatitis C antibody which is believed to protect those who recover from that disease for life, and yet still,  an “HIV” partial positive test indicates active infection in the minds of the medical establishment, contrary to the fundamental laws and track record of vaccination seroepidemiology. In fact the track record and intensity of “HIV” vaccine research is the best evidence in the history of vaccination that the Jennerian paradigm, expanded by Pasteur, is even tenable. The results of the latest Military-Thailand trial, that used the past failed AIDSVAX vaccine was simply re-used and boosted with aluminum in multiple injections, among 16,000 unsuspecting Thailand people.

When control-vaccinated groups seroconvert more frequently than “HIV” vaccinated groups even after repeated booster vaccinations as they did in THE STEP trial, and they invariably stop these trials early because of what they call “futility” and potential adverse harm to the recipients is tragic. Using modern techniques and isolation(s) of so-called “HIV,” rather than continuing to site or analyze the dusty old papers written by Montagnier, we can begin to appreciate how much of a scam “HIV/AIDS” science has become. As mentioned, even the co-Nobelist and co-discoverer of the molecular signature of “HIV” now claims, “we can catch it many times, no problem if you have a good immune system you can get rid of it,”: etc. Who knows what went on at the Pasteur 30 years ago?

Letter to opt out of vaccination written by the American Academy of Pediatrics, with advice regarding how to coerce parents who are unsure about vaccination:

Refusal to Vaccinate
Child’s Name: Child’s ID #
Parent’s/Guardian’s Name(s):
My child’s health care provider, has advised me that my child (named above)
should receive the following vaccines:
Recommended Declined
□ Hepatitis B vaccine
□ Diphtheria, Tetanus, acellular Pertussis (DTaP) vaccine
□ Diphtheria Tetanus (DT or dT) vaccine
□ Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine
□ Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine
□ Polio vaccine (IPV)
□ Measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine
□ Varicella (chickenpox) vaccine
□ Influenza (flu) vaccine
□ Meningococcal vaccine
□ Hepatitis A vaccine
□ Other

I have read the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vaccine Information Sheet(s) explaining the vaccine(s) and the disease(s) they prevent. I have had the opportunity to discuss these with my child’s health care provider, who has answered all of my questions regarding the recommended vaccine(s). I understand the following:

The purpose of and the need for the recommended vaccine(s)
The risks and benefits of the recommended vaccine(s)
If my child does not receive the vaccine(s), the consequences may include:
-contracting the illness the vaccine should prevent
-transmitting the disease to others
-the need for my child to stay out of daycare of school during disease outbreaks

My health care provider, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have all strongly recommended that the vaccine(s) be given Nevertheless I have decided to decline the vaccine(s) recommended for my child, as indicated above, by checking the
appropriate box under the column titled “declined.”

I know that failure to follow the recommendations about vaccination may endanger the health or life of my child and others that my child might come in contact with. I know that I may re-address this issue with my health care provider at any time, and that I may change my mind and accept vaccination for my child anytime in the future. I acknowledge that I have read this document in its entirety and fully understand it.

Parent/Guardian Signature Date
Witness Date
HE0342 Copyright©2002 9-80

Documenting Parental Refusal to Accept Vaccination
All parents and patients should be informed about the risks and benefits of preventive and therapeutic procedures, including vaccination. In the case of vaccination, federal law mandates this discussion. Despite the health care provider’s best efforts to explain its importance, some families may refuse vaccination for their children. The use of this or a similar form, demonstrating the importance you place on appropriate immunizations and focusing the parent’s attention on the unnecessary risk for which they are accepting responsibility, may in some instances induce a wavering parent to accept your recommendations.

In addition to concern for the health of their unimmunized patient, health care providers may be concerned about liability. The American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Infectious Diseases states:

Documentation of [vaccine risk communication] in the patient’s record may help to reduce any potential liability should a vaccine-preventable disease occur in the unimmunized patient (American Academy of Pediatrics. Informing Patients and Parents. In: Pickering LK, ed. 2003 Red Book: Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases. 26th ed. Elk Grove Village, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics; 2003:pages 4 to 6).

Health care providers may decide it is in their best interest to formally document a parent’s refusal to accept vaccination for a minor child. This form may be used as a template for such documentation, but should not be considered a legal document and should not substitute for legal advice from a qualified health care attorney. Completion of a form, in and of itself, never substitutes for good risk communication nor would it provide absolute immunity from liability. After completion of this form re-discussion of these issues at another time may still be appropriate. Completion of this form also does not provide a family with exemption from state school or day care entry requirements. This form may be duplicated or changed to suit your and your patients’ needs.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: